i 



/ 



PRACTICAL EFFICACY 



OF THE 



UNITARIAN DOCTRINE 



CONSIDERED, 



PRACTICAL EFFICACY 
UNITARIAN DOCTRINE 

CONSIDERED^ 
ISMniES OF LETTERS 

Eiv. ANDREW FULLER: 

Oecailoned by his Publication 

ENTITLED 

37ie Cahinutic and Socinian Systems examined and 
compared^ as to th&ir Moral Tendenci},'* 

TO WHICH IS ADDED THE THIRD EDITION OB 

AN ESSAY 

ON THE 

GROUNDS OF LOVE TO CHRIST. 
By JOSHUA TOULMIN, D. D- 

SECOND EDITION, 
Enlarged by additional IllusU-ations of the Subjectj and a Defence 
of the general Argument, 

IN TWO LETTERS TO A FRIEND, 

By way of Reply to Mr. Fuller's Strictures in his Tract 
entitled " Socinianism Indefensible.'" 

LONDON: 

SOLD BY J.JOHNSON, ST. PAUL's CHURCH JABIP^ 
1801. 

l^C Stozver, Printer^ King Stmt p Covsnt Garden.'] 



ADVERTISEMENT 

TO THE FIRST EDITION. 



The Title prefixed to these Letters will 
lead the Reader to expect from them, 
chiefly^ the disGiission of one point; but 
that of a point of great importance in itself, 
and the main one to which a reply to Mr. 
Fidler's Work need be directed. The evi- 
dence which the Author has produced ivi 
support of his own opinion, is dravv^n from 
passages of Scripture, which have so fre- 
quently occurred to all in the perusal of 
the New Testament, that it miglit seem 
unnecessary to allege them ; did it not 
often happen;, that, through the previous 
state of mind, the most obvious things, in 
a Writer, escape the Reader, or do not im- 
press him. The view, in which these pas- 
sages nov/ offer to notice, seems not to have 
been observed by Mr. Fuller; with whom 
a S the 



( ) 



the Author would scarcely have entered the 
lists, he grows so averse from personal con- 
troversy, had it not been that his work ap- 
peared to afford a fair opportunity to bring 
forward the portions of The Acts of the 
Apostles," which he has quoted, for the 
explicit purpose of showing the Practical 
Efficacy of the Unitarian Doctrine. He 
submits the v/hole to the candid attention 
of Mr. Fuller, and of the Reader; hoping, 
that TRUTH, and TRUTH alofie^ is the great 
object pursued by them and himself 

Taunton, 
June 4th, 



ADVER- 



ADVERTISEMENT 

TO THE SECOND EDITION. 



1 HREE years have elapsed, since i\Iiv 
Fuller published his animadversions on the 
Letters" which I addressed to him. Had 
not the whole impression of tliem been^ 
some time since, disposed of, it is probable 
that I should have taken no notice of Mr, 
Fuller's Tract entitled Socinianism Inde» 
fensibk but have left the argument, 
stated in the " Letters, to the attention of 
the Reader and its own force ; fully satis- 
fied, that it must carry conviction with it. 
This, I learn, has been the case, particularly 
in Wales ; where so much of my Piece as 
reviews the preaching of the Apostles, inde- 
pendently of any strictures on Mr. Fuller^ 
has been translated into Welch, by an ac- 
tive Minister of a large congregation, and 
to whose church there have been recently 

added 



( vi ) 



added forty communicants. A large im- 
pression of this Translation was soon sold^ 
and much attention excited by it. This 
circumstance, and the approbation the 

Letters" have met with^ have induced me 
to send them again to the press. The 
earnest desire antl encouragement of <i wor- 
thv Friend have determined me. not onlvto 
reprint them, but to insert, in proper places, 
such further illustrations as, I conceive, 
confirm the argument, and vindicate it from 
Mr. Fuller's animadversions ; and to annex 
to the whole a direct, general defence of it. 

The review of the Epistles to Timothy 
and Titus, was suggested, as a proper sequel 
to that of the preaching of the Apostles, by 
a very respectable Friend^. While I thank 
liim for the hint, I avail myself of this op- 
portmiity to express my great esteem for 
liis character, and my felicity in his friend-- 
ship and regards. 

They who have foraied their opinion of 
the " Letters" only through the ni^^ium of 

* Rev., John lioweL of Bridgwater, 

Mr. 



( vii ) 



Mr. Fuller's strictures, can have only a very 
imperfect idea of their tenorj and the 
strength of the argument which they ex- 
hibit. I have only to request^ that they 
would read and judge for themselves. The 
whole is nov/ submitted to their candid and 
impartial attention, in connexion with 
IMr. Fuller's Tracts. The ^eal of Unitarians 
does not tempt them to discountenance and 
suppress the reading of what is wrote against 
their opinions; but to promote, in the spirit 
of candor and meeiaiesS; discussion and 
investigation. 

We ask only to be heard ; and^ to the 
providence of the God of wisdom and truths 
we leave the event. 

Taunton, 
4th Oct. 1800. 



CONTENTS. 



LETTER I. 

Page 

The Author's Design explained and opened 1 

LETTER IL 

The Practical Efficacy of the Unitarian Doctrine 

proved from the Preaching of the Apostles $ 

LETTER III. 
The same Subject continued . . .... 39 

APPENDIX TO LETTER IIL 

The Subject continued, in a Preview of the Epistles 

to Timothy and Titus 53 

LETTER ly. 

Thie Concessions of the Fathers on this Head and 
of modern Writers „ The Creed of the ancien 
Church, and that of the Church of England ^ 
Unitarian Sentiments a Ground for Devotion 64 



LETTER V. 

The Unsuccessfulness of the Preaching of Unitari- 
ans. 



( X ) 

ans. The uncandid Conduct observed towards 
them, Mr.Fuller's Mode of Attack. His Appli- 
cation of the Term Socinians, The Propriety of 
the Name U?iitarians being claimed by Trinita- 
rians, The Resemblance of Sodniaiiism to De- 
ism, considered. Mr. Fuller's Charge against 
the Author of these Letters. A Quotation from 
Dr. Lardner. On judging others. A Reply to 
Mr. Fuller's Argument for refusing Commu- 
nion with thos€ who avow Socinian Princij)les 

APPENDIX, No. 1. 
On the Nature and Ground of the Love of Christ 103 

APPENDIX, No. 2. 
Two Letters' to a Friend , « » . » . . . 129 

N. B. The addiims in this edition^ whether of Uxt or notc^ are included 
htzveen crotchets. 




LETTERS 



LETTERS 

TO THE 

REVEREND ANDREW FULLER. 



LETTER L 

Reverend Sir, 

It was but lately that your celebrated piece, en« 
titled The Calvinistic and Socinian Systems 
E^^.mined and Compared," fell in my way, so as 
to find me at leisure to read it. In the mean time 
I have heard it spoken of in high terms of appro- 
bation, and an expectation strongly expressed that 
some one, of those against whose religious scheme 
it is pointed, w^ould think it incumbent upon him 

B to 



( 2 ) 

to reply to it*, I freely own, that I wished, that 
this expectation had eie now been ans^vered. It 
appears to me, that your aiguments do not carry 
that incontrovertible weight, which in the opinion 
of many they possess : and no one can doubt, that 
the gentlemen, on passages in whose writings many 
of your reflections are grounded, are every way 
equal to the contest, if thay saw fit to enter the 
lists with you. As they have not done it, I pre- 
sume, they think it sufficient to leave the candid 
reader to judge between you and them. But their 
silence does not bind others to a like reserve. 
Another may engage in the controversy, which 

* Let no one, -vA'ho like Mr. Robinson, is disposed to exchange 
•* Christianity for Socinianism, say that he has accurately and ma- 
*' turely weighed the arguments on both sides, till he has read tKis 
*' work : i.e. Mr. Fuller's Calvinistic and Socinian Schemes Com" 

pared. It is a work which, at least, demands a reply. The 
** author is one, with whom it will be no disparagement to Dr. 
** Priestley himself, or any of his renowned champions to 
*^ take up the gauntlet. Indeed, if they do not enter the lists 

with him, the public will be led to conclude, that their religion 

has received a wound from which it will not easily recover, 
** Mr. Fuller*s arguments are "very little ad hoinintm, but almost 

ail ad doctrinam. These arguments are ingenious and solid ; and 
** it seems incumbent, I say, on Dr. Priestley or some of his 
** friends to reply, though the task may not be quite so easy and 
** pleasant as that of writing funeral eulogies on Mr. Robinson." 
Brief Reflections on the Eloquence of the Pulpit \ by the Rev. John 
Gardiner, Rector of Bra ilsford, in the County of Derby; and 
Curate of St. Mary Magdalenj Taunton. P. 33, NetK 



they 



C 3 ) 



tiicy decline : and, thinking that it may serve the 
cause of scriptural truth and christian candor, the 
person who now addresses you will follow the im- 
pulse of his mind, to oiFer some thoughts on your 
publication. 

But that my purpose may notbe mistaken^ I would, 
here, premise, that a minute reply to your argu- 
ments is not intended : nor is it my design to follow 
you from chapter to chapter, and paragraph to para- 
graph. I shall confine myself to one pointy but that 
a point which I think of the most essential moment, 
and decisive as to "the moral tendency," or practical 
influence of one of the two schemes, which you 
review. 

You observe, that " there are two methods of 
reasoning, w'^hich may be used in ascertaining 
the moral tendency of principles. The first is 
*^ by comparing the principles themselves with the 
nature of true holiness, and the agreement or 
" disagreement of the one with the other* The 
^' second by referring to plain and acknowledged 
facts ; judging of the nature of causes by their 
" effects*." 

On this last ground, Sir, would I now stand up 
an advocate for the tendency and efficacy, in a 
practical view, of the sentiments which you oppose 
a^s Socinian tenets. But, let it be, here^ remem- 

B 2 



bered^ 



( 4 ) 

bcred, that I mean not to canvass the truth or false- 
hood of those assertions which you produce from the 
writings of Dr. Priestley, Mr. Lindsey, Mr. Belsham, 
and others ; nor t© examine either the accuracy of 
your quotations, or the justness of your conclusions. 
The principles, the moral tendency of which I pur- 
pose to consider, are not the particular assertions of 
any individual author, nor any incidental sentiments 
any one may have connected with the avowal or 
defence of them- In this I may, perhaps, appear to 
depart from the topics you discuss ; it may be so : ■ 
but I am confident, that I shall come to the main 
point, which is the scheme itself , though I pass by 
passages scattered up and down in the writings of its 
known advocates, and taken in a detached form, out 
of the connexion in which they originally stand. 

The fundamental principles of those whom you 
choose to call Sociniais^s are, that there is but 
" one God, the sole former, supporter, and. 
governor of the universe, the only proper object 
of religious worship ; and that there is but one 
mediator between God and man, the Man Christ 
Jesus, who was commissioned by God to instruct 
men in their duty,, and to reveal the doctrine of a 
future life/^ 

These are the principles which they consider as 
forming the primitive system of the christian doc- 
trine. On these proper Unitarian principles, they 
conceive the cause of true religion and virtue may 

be 



( 5 ) 

be most eftectually promoted : and that thet?e plaiiij 
unadulterated truths of Christianity, when fairly 
taught and inculcated, are of themselves sufficient to 
form the minds of those, who embrace them, to that 
true dignity and excellence of character, to vviiich 
the gospel was intended to elevate them^. 

That they are so, is the point which I affirm, an-d 
shall endeavour to establish. If I can establish it by 
clear, decisive evidence, it will supersede the exami- 
nation of that comparison into which you so fully 
enter, and of all the particulars into wliich your 
elaborate performance branches out* 

We think it. Sir, a just ground of boast over our 
fellow-chrlstians who hold different tenets from us, 
that we can express our fundamental opinions in tlie 
xvords of scripture fo To us there is but one 

God, 

* Declaration of the London Unitarian Society, 

[f Mr. Fuller affects to show, by way of animadversion, that the 
firrt principles, amongst the Calvinists, are to be expressed in the 
vords of scripture : thus, That there is a Father^ a Son, and a Holy 
GiiOJij ill whose name ive are baptized — the zvord zvas God — Christ died 
for oui sins according to the scriptures. He supposes, that it would be 
replied to this statement, " that I do not deny any one of these pro- 
positions, but the sense put upon these passages by the Calvinists : 
that it is not scripture, but the glosses upon it, that I oppose (i)." 
I should make this reply : and, considering the purpose for which 
these passages are now produced^ I will make this further reply : 
namely, That the discriminating sentiments, for which the Calvinists 

(ij Sgcinianism Indefensible, p. 15, 

B 3 are 



■ ( 6 ) 

God, the Father, of whom are all things, and 
we hi Him : and one Lord Jesus Christ, by 
whom are all things, and we by Him 1 Cor. 
viii, 6. " There is one God, and one Mediator 

between God and man, the man Christ Jesus 
1 Tim. ii. 3. And so, we think it a most material 
and propitious circumstance in the vindication of 
our sentiments, that we can appeal to scripture facts 

are strenuous advocates, are not expressed in these passages. They 
do not assert, that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are one God ; 
they say nothing about a sameness of essence and equality of power t 
they say nothing of an infinite satisfaction and a vicarious atone- 
jiient. And, in particular, t1~.^re is in the sentence, the word, was 
Godi an ambiguity ; out of several interpretations, which offer ta 
ascertain and limit the meaning, the Trinitarian is one only. Will 
yix Fuller aver that these scriptural propositions fully express his 
opinicrs ? Were I, or any one, to offer to subscribe to these pas- 
sages, as exhibiting a creed tantamount to his awn, would he nat 
demur to admit them in this view ? Would he not be ready to 
require some other declarations concerning the unity of the Father, 
Son, and Holy Spirit in the godhead ; the sense in which we under- 
stand the terms " w^ord" and "God*'; and the manner of the 
operation of Christ's death? V/ ould he allow that a declaration made in 
these scripcural sentences came up to a profession of the whole truth,^ 
with respect to the first principles embraced byCalvinists ? — If so, 
he fails in this attempt to express them in scriptural language. 
Either the most pertinent passages of scripture, for his purpose, did 
not offer to his recollection: or the scriptures do not furnisli i 
language and propositions adequate to it, and that reach it, So that 
I still maintain, that the Unitarians have, in this instance, the supe- 
riority over their fellow-christians, the Trinitarians. They find 
thei7- fundamental opinions fully and explicitly expressed in the 
vsry words of scripture.] 

to 



( T ) 

to show their practical tendency and efEcacy. It 
" was a distinguishing mark of primitive preaching,'' 
as you observe, that it commended itself to every 
nian^s conscience. People, in general, could not 
sit unconcerned under it. We are told of some 
who were cut to the heart, and took counsel to 
slay the preachers ; and of others who were 
pricked to the heart, and said, Men and 
brethren, what shall we do*?" We think our- 
selves justified in asserting, that these impressions 
were made, this holy solicitude awakened by the 
preaching of the pure Unitarian doctrine* The 
world, we say, was converted by this very doctrine ; 
on this doctrine were churches formed : this was 
the doctrine which worked effectually in them, who 
believed. 

I accede to your remark, that ^' there is nothing 
" like experiment inTcligion, as well as in philoso- 
phy. As to his, /. e. Dr. Priestley^s talking what 
^' tendency his sentiments would have upon heathens 
and mahometans. provided a free intercourse could 
be obtained, this is all conjecture. The best way 
to know their efficacy is by trial, and trial hath 
been made f." Yes: and, I will add, to that 
glorious display of the efficacy of those principles ; 
when such was the force wdth which they reached 
the minds of those to whom they were 'addressed, 

* Pa^e 24. f Page 47. 

B 4 th e 



( s ) 

that ^* they turned to God from idols, to serve the 
LIVING AND TRUE GoD, and to Wait for HIS SOK 
from Heaven, whom he raised from the dead, 
even Jesus w^ho hath delivered us from the wrath 
to come." 

But here, Sir, I will pause and relieve your 
attention and my own, by subscribing myself with 
respect, 

Your% &c. 



( 9 ) 



LETTER IL 

Reverend Sir, 

AT the close of my former letter I advanced what 
may, probably , appear to some a bold assertion ; name- 
ly, that the world was converted, that the sinners of 
mankind were brought to faith and repentance by the 
preaching of the simple Ujutarictn doctrine. You 
have said, ^' that Socinian writers can not so much 
" as pretend^ that their doctrine has been used to 

convert profligate snmers to the love of God and 
*^ holiness Now, I not only pretend, but hope 
to prove, that at the first planting of the gospel, this 
was the doctrine which was etTectual for tliis purpose. 
Should it not, in modern times, be eiTectuai to the 
&ame great ends, the cause must be sought in other 
circumstances, not in the nature of the doctrine or its 
inefficiency. 

You are not to be told, that there are times/; in 
whick men hear not Moses emd the Prophets \ nor 
would be persuaded, though one rose from the dead: 
and yet you w^ould not say, that the preaching of 
Moses and the Prophets, or the appearance of one 
from the dead, had not an efEcacy, or a tendency, to 
bring raen to repentance. It is well known to you, 

B > that 



{ 10 } 

that the flock of Christ, while he was on earth, was 
but " a Httle flock,'' and that prophecy represented 
him as lamenting the unsuccessfulness of his preach- 
ing, and saying, I have laboured in vain ; I have 

spent my strength for nought, and in vain." It is 
well known to you, that the apostles, notwithstand- 
ing that thousands were sometimes converted by their 
ministry, also found reason to cry out, Who hath 
*^ believed our report, and to whom hath the arm of 

the Lord been revealed?" Rom. x. 16. Great mul- 
titudes were not converted: and, yet, you would not 
impeach the efficacy of the doctrine they preached. 
You would not say, that there was ^' nothing in it to 

alarm the conscience or interest the heart Wc 
think it, therefore, not a just consequence, nor a gene- 
rous conclusion which, admitting the fact, you draw 
from the unsuccessfulness of those who preach the 
Socinian doctrine. And, if we can show, that this 
very doctrine was the doctrine, by which, in the first 
ages, the conscience was alarmed, you will be ready, 
I would hope, to retract your reflections. 

To this argument, then, I will proceed. We will 
take. Sir, the NewTestament into our hands; and we 
will open the history of the planting of the gospel ; 
of that period, when the word of God was glorified^ 

and thousands were born in a day." 

[Wq arcj by the Providence of Godj furnished with 



? Page 



^ his- 



( H ) 

a history, that lecords the Sf/stem of Heligwn^ which 
the first preachers of Christianity pubhshed to the 
world. It narrates the Acts of the Apostles ; not 
in their private capacity, ot their domestic connections ; 
but in their office as Ministers of Christ, authorised 
by Him to ''preach the gospel to every creature and 
^' to make disciples," or converts in all nations* Such 
a history, of course and necessarily, involves in its 
details the principles by which the end of their office 
was to be secured. The history is very concise, but 
the design of it could not ha ve been answer ed, unless 
^he writer of it had, at least in some places, recorded 
the doctrine taught, as well as its effects in the con- 
version of the world. In this light it has appeared to 
orthodox wa'iters. '' 7'his golden book," says the 
learned Dr. Du Veil, ^' quite through displays the 
*' singular providence of God in gathering together 

to himself and preferring his church. It oprn? 

and explains w^hat was the beginning and rise of 
*' the christian religion ; after what manner the 
/' Apostles began the preaching of the gospel^/* 

In this divine book," says another judicious 
writer, '' we may see, how Christ subdued the. 
*' world to the obedierice of the gospel, by a few 
" illiterate men. Here we have examples of the 
*' prudence, faithfulness, and diligence of the holy 

Apostles. Here we may see, how they lived, what 
^< they taught, how they dealt with the obstinate, 

On the Acts* pjge e.] 

B 6 *^ how 



{ 12 ) 

how with the infirm, and how they acted in the 
doubtful and controversial cases of the church*/' 
Beza considered this book, as containing what 
" may be styled the principal public annals and com- 
*^ mentaries according to which the administration 
*' of the christian church was at first directed, and 
to which it is to be recalled f." ''It is indeed, 
the most momentous part of the sacred history 
itself: for Moses and the Prophets referred to 
*^ the coming of the Messiah: and, the Messiah, 
when he came, referred to the pouring out and mi- 
*' nistryof the Spirit; as the last and best dispensation 
*^ which God would ever grant to mankind :J:.'* 
Where, then, shall we look for n]tformation concern- 
ing xht pinnciples which operated in producing the 
great effects of those times,'' but into this book? 
The instructions the Apostles communicated, the prin- 
pies they taught, were essential to tlie accomplish- 
ment of the inission, on which they were sent : and 
must form a no less essential part of the history of 
their Acts. These principles, accordingly, are not 
touched in an occasional way merely ; they form a 
large proportion of this book: they make, at times, 

Cradock's Apostolical History." Preface.] 

[f Hie liber complectatur, veltiti, publicos praecipue commenta* 
rios etannales, ad quoset initio dirigi, et nunc revocari totius Eccle- 
siaj Christianse administrationem, oportuit. B.ezae Annotationes 

[:}: Benson'sHistory of the Planting of the Christian Religion^ vol. 
Frcface, page 5.} 

the 



the chief part of whole chapters : as chapters ii, iir, 
vii, X, xiii, xvii, xx, xxiv, and xxvi. It would be 
absurd to suppose, that a history of the method of 
propagating the christian rehgion, should not con- 
tain a view of what was said as well as of what was 
done by the Apostles ; of their doctrine as well as 
their actions. And who will venture to say, that the 
sacred historian in the relation, that he has given of 
the steps, w^hich the Apostles took to convert the 
%vorld from error, ignoi ance and vice, hath emitted 
any principle, or hath left out any doctrine, essential 
to this end, and of actual efficacv in secui'ing it ? 
Though such principles are not on every occasion 
repeated, if they are, on some occasions, detailed 
should not that satisfy us, concerning their nature 
and extent r To charge Luke with omitting, in his 
account of the preaching of the Apostles, any essen* 
tial principles, would invalidate the authority, and, to 
a great degree, the utility of his history. Nay: if he 
be supposed to have written under the direction of 
the diA^ine spirit, to charge him with such omissions 
would be in fact a charge against God himself,, and 
a much more heinous oiFence in the opinion of seri- 
ous christians, than to exclude some chapters from 
the sacred text, because on enquiry there offers evi- 
dence of their being interpolations. To this book, 
therefore, on every ground of reason and propriety, 
may the appeal be made concerning <^ the principles, 

the 



( 14 ) 

the piiblicatk^n of which preceded the conversions 
^* in the primitive age*."j 

The first sermon^ so wonderfully successful, as to 
bring over to the christian faith about three thousand^ 
was that of Peter on the day of Pentecost, Acts, ii, 

[This discourse was addressed to Jews, devout 
^' men, assembled at Jerusalem, from every nation 

under heaven:" who were astonished to hear the 
Apostles, after they w^ere iilled with the Holy Spirit, 
speak in the tongue of every country, where they 
wxre respectively born. To reconcile them to this 
singular phnenomenon, and to account for it, the 
Apostle refers them to the prophecy of Joel, ch. ii. 
28, &c. predicting the effusion of the Spirit on per- 
sons of different sexes and ages, and, at the same 
time foreteliing the awful judgments of God in the 
dissolution of the Jewish stare, and yet affording the 

The addition of the long preceding paragraph is in consequence 
the following passage in Mr. Fuller's " Socinianism Indefensible.'"^ 
** Dr Toulmin proceeds on tlie supposition that the history of tlie 
" Acts of the Apostles is in itself, inde pendant of the other parts of 
^* the sacred writings, a connplete account of the substance of, at least, 
what the Apostles preached, and that it ascertains those principles 
the publication of which preceded the conversions in the primitive 
" age. But v/hy should he suppose this ? The book professes to be 
a History of the Act^ of the Apastles. As to the Principles which 
^' operated in producing the great effects of those tim.es, they are 
^« occasionally touched ; but that not being the professed obj ect of the 
sacred writer, it is but occasionally. He does not alvv'ays relate 
c^en the substance of what the Apostles preached.*' Page 42, 43.] 



hope 



( i5 ) 



hope of salvation to the devout ; saying, " It shall 
come to pass, that whosoever shall call cn the 
name of the I.ord shall he saved." In the origindl, 
that is in the Hebrew, from whence the passage is 
a quotation, it is, whosoever shall call on the name 
" of Jehovah shall be saved." l^he clause is evi- 
dently introduced casually, as pcn^t of the prophecy, 
and not on account of its peculiar and appropriate 
application to the character of Jesus. For, though 
the Apostle immediately preaches Jesus of Nazareth, 
he does not take up this clause and apply it to him ; but 
confines his application of the prophecy to that event, 
which had raised wonder. See v. 23 

Let 

[* Mr. Fuller contends, that the Apostles taught the proper 
^eity as well as the humanity of Christ : and exhibited him as " pke 

Lord on whose name sinners were to call for salvation." Acts. ii. 
21. comp. ch. ix. 14. xxii. 16. Rom. x. 12. and 1. Cor. i. 2. The 
force of Mr. Fuller's assertion turns upon two points: one is^ that 
Christ is the person meant in the passages to which he refers ; the 
•ther is. that " to call upon the name of Christ," in the most natural 
and obvious, if not necessary, sense, signifies addressing him by 
prayer; ' His application of the first and third texts to Christ fs 
founded on the ambiguity of the term Kv^iog in Greeks which may 
refer to Jesus, or to God the Father : but there is no such un- 
certainty in the Hebrew, from which these texts are a quotation. 
The meaning of the term Jehovah is one, precise and definite, 
limited to that Being, who under the Old Testament was denominated 
the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob ; and under the New, the God 
and Father of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, Acts. iii. 13, 15, 
ch. V. 30, 31. It is admitted, that Christ is meant in the second and 
fo-urth texts, to which Mr, Fuller refers ; but it by means follows, 

that 



( 16 ) 



Let us go over the discourse, and see what were the 
doctrines taught in it. They were these ; that Jesus 

of 

that calling on -his name," mfans invoking him bv p'*ayer. The 
learned Dr Hammond; a Trfnitarian, understood the phrase as 
signifying, being called by the navie of Christ. I will quote his- words. 
Call upon the name of Jesus Christ, ^'jriy.ecKHaOai signifies to be sur- 
named. Matt. x. 3. Luke xxii. 3, Acts. i. 23, and iv. 36, in many 
places : and so in a passive, not active signification. Agreeable to 
this, jTu-i xaXhjUc-vdi z\o(j.rc Ir/js X.:i^y is to be Called by the 'name of jesus 
Christ^^ as an agnomen, or supernomination, which notes the special 
'* relation we have to him ; as the spouse of that husband whosff 
name ]s, called upon her, Isai, iv. r. (which is -the direct literal 
" notion of f:rixaX>i<7?5«i here] or as the servant tonhat master, by 
whose name he is called also; and so^Ti-KuXucrOai Dyo(/.K X^ig-a ishat 
*' a periphrasis of Christians and no more." Hammond in 1. Cor. i. 
2. as quoted by Mr. Christie, p. 241 — 2. in his " Discourses upon 
the Divine Unity." This, it is known to, and acknowledged by 
good critics, is no forced interpretation, no uncommon construction 
ofthe phrase- It is no violation of the genius and import of the Greek 
text. But to explain the phrase, as signifying io pray io Christ, 
is a violation of the simplicity of the directions for religious worship 
laid down by Christ, who never taught his disciples to pray to him- 
self, but to our Father who is in heaven : to whom he himself 
prayed. It is a violation of a41 propriety and consistency of ideas 
concerning the character of Christ : for, if he doth hear our prayers, 
and can and doth by his own power relieve our wants, to what 
purpose is he our mediator ? On what grounds are we to pray to 
God the Father in his name? The sense v/hich Mr, Fuller v/ould. 
affix to. the term, would make Christ at once the medium, and tlie 
object of worship. It would introduce tv/o objects of prayer. 
It would contradict the express direction of Christ. John 
xvi. 23. " In that day/' i. e. after the comforter is sent 
ye shall, Asx me nothing. Verily, verily I say anto you,;. 
** whatsoever ye shall ask the father in my name, he. will give, 
it you.** In interpreting the language of scripture it is to be con- 



( n ) 

of Nazareth was a m an, approved of God, by mira- 
^' cles, signs and wonders which GoD did by him; 
that being by the right-hand of God exalted, and 
- having received of the Father the promise of the 
holy spirit, he had slied forth that gift which they 
then saw and heard ; and that God had made that 
*■ same Jesus, whom they had crucified, both Lord and 
" Christ." AVhen the hearers of this discourse were 
pricked in their hearts, and said, " What shall we 
do?" Peter replied, repent and be baptised every 
one, in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission 
oY sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the holy 
spirit." 2. e. such gifts as they were then witnesses 
to. Here is nothing but the plain Unitarian doctrine. 
Here are none of those topics which you suppose 
to have been the great topics on which the reformers 
insisted : and which, in later times, you conceive, 
rendered so illustriously successful the preaching of 
the Franks, the Edwards, the Tennants, and 
others Not a word came frorn the lips of Peter, 
here, concerning the depravity of human nature, the 
deity and atonement of Christ, and justification by 
the imputation of Christ'^s righteousness. Not a word 
like that of the Moravians, who preached to the 
Gieenlanders concerning ^' the Creator taking upoiv 

j:ldere.d not only what sense the words rna^ beaj, or what sense they 
do sometimes bear ; but what sense is agreeable to the connection 
anxi occasion ; and what sense is consistent with the nature of the 
subject to wbich they applied, and correspondent to received and 
general truths.] 

Paje 26, 

him 



( 18 ) 

him hitman nature and dying for our sins-' Peter 
doth not in this manner preach Christ, and yet his 
preaching was effectual to the conversion of multi- 
tudes. He insists upon a few plain facts only, 
illustrative of the unity and supremacy of God the 
Father, the humaaity and divine mission of Jesus of 
Nazareth ; such/<:?6'^^ as form the creed of the Uni- 
tarian: and yet his preaching, I repeat it, was 
effectual to awaken and convert multitudes. I have 
been, often, much affected and impressed with the 
simplicity of this discourse. I see none of the lead- 
ing peculiar sentiments of Calvinism in it ; I see na 
doctrine of the Trinity ; I see no doctrine of a satis- 
faction to the divine justice in it. But the prominent 
features of this discourse are the fundamental articles 
of the Unitarian creed. 

I look next into the third chapter of the Acts, and 
I hear the same Peter preaching, in the temple, to 
the people, who were filled with wonder and amaze- 
ment, at the cure which the lame m^an had received. 
His sermon is to the same purpose as the former, 
namely, that the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of 
Jacob, the God of their fathers, had glorified hi^ 
son Jesus : that those things which God had 
shewed by the mouth of all his prophets that Christ 
should suffer he had fulfilled: that their duty was 
to repent and be converted, that their sins might be 
" blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall 



* Page 47. 



" com*e 



( 19 ) 



come from the presence of the Lord ; that the 
*^ heavens must receive Jesus, until the times of the 
restitution of all things, which God had spoken 
by the mouth of his holy prophets since the world 
began : that Moses had truly said, ' a prophet 
*^ shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of 
" your Brethren, like unto me: him shall ye 
hear in all things whatsoevei* he shall say unto 
you;' and therefore, addressing himself to the 
people, he adds, ^ Unto you, first, God having 
" raised up his son Jesus, sent him to bless you in 
turning away every one of you from his iniquity." 
Here God is uniformly spoken of as one beingy and 
Jesus as ranking with the prophets^ as one of the 
human race, of Jewish extract, raised from the dead 
and invested with authority to require the obedience 
of men to his commandments. [He is, indeed, cha- 
racterised by a term not applicable to any prophet of 
former ages ; by a term appropriate to himself, as 
the way, the truth, and the life;" John xiv. 6. 
He is styled xht Prince of life ^ whom the Jews 
^' had killed aex'')'^^ C^^^^, e, the guide, the leader 
to everlasting hfe^. J But, as to the doctrines, which 

you, 

So is the title explained by B^za, du Veil, and Doddridge, as 
well as by Bp. Pearce. The word in the original," says the last 
learneti writer, " signifies one who leads the van or front of an 
*^ arniy." Christ conducts his followers to life and glory. Barabbas, 
the murderer^ whom the Jews had desired to be granted to them^ 
V. 14, was the destroyer of life, and led his adherents Into practices 

thai: 



{ 20 ) 



you, Sir, conceive to be the only effectual principles 
by which repentance towards God, and faith in 
Christ Jesus are to be produced, I meet w ith none 
of them here. Yet though none of those principles 
are insisted upon^ or even mentioned, though here 

that ended in death. *' The contrast," as observes Dr. Doddridge, 
between killing such a person as Jesus and interceding for Ba- 
** rabbas, has a peculiar energy.^* But this interpretation of lh« 
word does not come up to Mr. Fuller's ideas. He, p. 46, under- 
stands the apostle as declaring by the term Prince of life, *' that the 
person whom the jews had slain was no other than the Creator 
of the world in human nature." But, if the reader will examine 
all the texts, where the power of " quickening whom he will," or 
of giving life, is claimed by Christ or ascribed to him, he will find 
that it uniformly means raising the dead, not imparting life at first : 
he will also perceive, on referring to the passages in which the 
original word. a^x^),o;, variously translated prince, captain, and 
author^ is ascribed to Jesus, it is limited to his influence and energy 
in our spiritual, moral, and eternal life. As Acts v. 31, " APr/wcf," 
a leader or captain. " and a Saviour to give repentance unto Israel 
a7id forgiveness of sin.' ^ Heb. ii. 10, "The Captain of our Sal^ 
vation.'* Ch. xii. 2, Looking unto Jesus, the Author and 
Finisher of /cz?M " It is, therefore, contrary to the analogy of 
the scripture language, in the application of this term, to assign to 
it the meaning, which Mr. Fuller does in the passage before us. 
When, as in Acts xvii. 27, this present existence is ascribed to its 
Author, it is represented as derived not from Jesus but from God, 
who ordained him. to be the Judge of the world* V. 31. The New 
Testament is not the history of the frst creation of this materfal 
world and of man, but of his new and mora! creation by Jesus 
Christ. Nor is the Gospel the doctrine concerning the origin and 
author of human existence; but concerning the resurrection and 
future life, and concerning Jesus, as the preacher and giver of it.] 



is 



( 21 ) 



i-s nothing but a pure Unitarian discourse, I find, and 
you, Sir, methinks, must observe it with astonish- 
ment, as an effect very contrary to your apprehension, 
Many beheved, and the number of men were about 
" five thousand." Ch. iv. 4. 

I then accompany Peter before the tribunal of the 
high-priest, and I again listen, to hear his doctrine : 
not disgusted with the simplicity of his former dis- 
courses, but impressed v/ith their simplicity and the 
energy with which they acted. Such was that 
energy, that I see no occasion that there was for him 
to introduce, in a future discourse, any other, new 
principles to aid its operation on the human mind. 
I wait, however, to hear what he will say ; and how 
far he will pursue the same strain of address or de- 
viate from it. The same strain is adopted, and the 
same principles as before, alone are urged. ^* Be it 
known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, 
that by the name of Jesus Christ, of Nazareth, 
whom you crucified, whom God raised from the 
^* dead, even oy him doth this man (/. ^. the lame 
man of whom we read in the former chapter) 
stand here before you whole. This is the stone 
which was set at nought by you builders, which 
is become the head of the corner : neither is there 
salvation in any other ; for there is none other 
f name under heaven^ given among men, whereby 

we 



) 

*^ we must be saved*." ^ can discover here, also^ 
no other doctrines but the unity of God, the humanity 

of 

Mr Fuller has, here, 'the following animadversions. ^« Did 
" Peter," he asks, " speak as would * a i-nodern Unitarian,* when 
he said to his countrymen, * Neither is there salvation i?i any other : 
for there is none other name under heaven given amongst men, 
*' whereby we must be saved V such language, 1 fear, is seldom, if 
ever, used in their pulpits. It is such, however, as I have never 
" met with in their writings. On the contrary, one of their 
principal writers endeavours to exphin it away, or to prove that 
** it is not meant of * salvation to eternal life, but of deliverance 
from bodily di5eascs(i)."— Dr. Priestley is not alone or singularin 
this interpretation of the passage ; nor is the meaning which he affixes 
to it peculiar to Unitarians. For while Erasmus, Beza, du Veil, 
Doddridge, Limborch and I'Enfant understand Peter, as speaking 
of spiritual salvation, so do some Unitarians, Wissovatius, a Pole, 
thus glosses the words. " Non per Mosem, Patriarchas, &c. To b$ 
savedmt^i\s to be delivered from our sias, from the guilt and pun* 
ishment of them, i.e. from eternal death : and perfect, eternal 
deliverance from sin is to be had by Jesus Christ only, not by 
Moses, the Patriarchs, Prophets, and Prie3ts(2)*" Mr. Haynes, 
likewise, explains the word spiritual salvation : and expresses 
his sense of the passage thus ; There is no other or different 
way of salvation than what Christ taught, nor any different 
Teacher, The way of Salvation is but one and a different 
Teacher must be a false Teacher (3) Dr. Chandler, whom 
it may be supposed Mr. Fuller Vvill not class with Calvinists and 
Trinitarians, in a copious and animated strain, pursues this sense 

[(1) Dr. Priestley's Faniil-iar Letters^ No 14.] 
[(2) Wolzogenii Opera, torn, ii. in loc] 

[(3) " Scripture Account of the Attributes and Worship of God 
«^ and of the Character and OfHces of Christ," ch. 24.] 



( 23 ) 



of Christ, his rcsiiiTectlon from the dead, and salvation 
through him. Peter speaks as would an Unitariai>. 

He 

<yf the place through a whole sermon on the words(i). Socinus and 
Crellius, also, explain them, exclusively of spiritual and eternal 
salvation. Whereas Cornelius a Lapide, as quoted by Pool, applies 
them to both spiritual and bodily healing* The learned Dt. Whitby, 
while he embraced the orthodox faith concerning the doctrine of the 
Trinity, took great pains to prove that the word o-w^^jva^, to he savedy 
here signified healing, and argued it from ihe connection and many 
texts, especially in the evangelists. And more lately, Bp. Pearce 
asserts that the salvation meant here is a temporal one, and thus in- 
terprets the words : " Neither is there cure by any other name 

the Exorcists seem to have thought in ch. xix. 13. The fact is, . that 
neither the one sense nor the <)ther is necessarily connected with any 
peculiar opinions concerning the nature of Christ and the influence 
of his death. The question, with candid critics, is, whether the 
important truth, that Christ is the only name whereby we can attain 
to eternal salvation, is to be deduced from this text. That it is 
the doctrine of other texts, or that Jesus Christ is *' the only 
Mediator between God and Man," modern Unitarians, Mr. Fuller 
is to be informed, ^dmit with a firm faith and lively gratitude. 
Dr. Priestley, who endeavours to prove that deliverance from bodily 
diseases is meant in the text, has clearly and strongly expressed 
himself on this point, adopting the words of Bp. Hurd ; " That it 
pleased God to give us eternal life only in his Son, and in his 
Son only as living aiid dying for us, I readily admit. This is 
(;€rtainly the doctrine of the New Testament^ 2).'* — A late learned 
author, in the Arian scheme, supposeth that the apostle, from the 
particular instance of a bodily deliverance before his eyes, raised 
his thoughts to a nobier salvation; yet he shows, with much judgn. 

[(1) Posthumous Sermons,** vol. iv. No. 10.] 

[(2) History of the Corruptions of Christianity,'* voLii, pc 486.}, 

ment 



He and Joiin were dismissed with a strict charge, 
not to speak at all, nor to teach in the name of Jesus. 
On being dismissed, they went to their company 
and reported all the chief priests and elders had said 
unto them, on which they all, with one accord, lift 
up their voices in an act of devotion, addressing 
Jehovah as one person^ s^jlng : — ''Thou art God 
" who hast make heaven and earth, and the sea, and 
all that in them is ; who by the mouth of thy 
servant, David, didst say, why did the heathen 
rage, &c. : for of a truth against t/ij/ holy child 
(or servant) Jesus whom thou hast anointed, 
both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles^ 
and the people of Israel gathered together ; and 
now, Lord, grant unto thy servants that with all 
boldness they may speak thy word ; and that 
signs and wonders may be done by the name of 
THY holy child (servant) Jesus. The historian 
informs us that upon this, all were filled with the 
" holy spirit, and spake the zmrd of God with bold- 
" ness." I pursue the history to learn what was 
the word which they preached, and I am told^ v. 33, 
that, with great power gave the apostles witness 
of the 7'esurrection of Jesus, and great giace was 

ment, that the words understood of a temporal salvation contain a 
pertinent and interesting meaning, and form an appeal on the excel* 
lence of Christ's character and truth of his mission (i).] 

[(i) Bulkley's *' Sermons on the I'arables and Miracles," vol fv. 
p. 257—264.] 

Upon 



<^ upon them all." [The preaching of the apostlea 
was very successful, though the doctrine which they 
inculcated was plain and simple l consisting not in 
abstruse speculations, but in incontestible facts. 
Other principles, besides what they expressly ad- 
vanced, might be influential in the conversions of 
those early times The minds of the Jews, it 
is not to be denied, were in a state to receive the 
impressions produced by the doctrine, which the 
apostles taught. They already adniitted the first 
principles of religion, such as the being of God, the 
excellence and purity of his moral government, and 
the divine origin of the Mosaic dispensation. Manure 
cast on the ground has an influence on a future har- 
vest : but it is from sowing the seed the harvest im* 

[^^ " To suppose that the principles which are particularly spe* 

*' cified in the history of the Acts were the only ones which were 
influential in the conversions of those times, would be to exclude^ 
not only those doctrines which are commonly called Calvinistic, 
but various others which are allowed on all hands to be the first 

'* principles of religion* such as the being of a God, the excel* 
lency and purity of his rrioral government, the divine origin of 

^' the Old Testament, Stc, The Apostles, in preaching to the Jcws^ 
did not assert these principles, bat they supposed them. It were 

'' unreasonable to expect they should have done otherwise,- seeing 
these were principles which theilr lieareta professedly -admitted 
and undoubtedly had an influence in their conversion by pre- 
paring and disposing their minds for the reception of those 

" truths ; on the hearing of which the change of heart and character 
immediately depended." Fuller's Socinianism Indefensible/' 

P' 44-] ^ : V 

t? mediately 



( 26 ) 



mediately arises : and on the nature of the seed sown 
does that of the harvest depend. The effect of the 
apostles' preaching Is properly and peculiarly ascribed, 
not to the principles already admitted, whichprepared 
the minds of men for further discoveries, for new 
ti'uths, but to those truths themselves; to those 
truths, which were appropriate to the occasion and 
accompanied, v. 33, with great power w^ith a 
divine and commanding evidence ; or to the seed 
aown. This consisted in the principles specified in 
the preceding passages.] Here is no mention of 
any otherdoctrines but those fundamental principles, 
which Unitarians hold. All corresporids with their 
ideas ^f the primitive christian doctrine There is 
not a hint of those principles, which you conceive 
so essentially necessary to the conversion of the 
sinner. 

The boldness with which, in contradiction to the 
order of their superiors, these holy men resumed 
their province of preaching Christ, did not go long 
unobserved. In the next chapter I find them im- 
prisoned : and, by a miraculous power being deliver- 
ed from their confinement, again preaching in the 
temple, and again summoned before the council, de- 
fending-^TEeir conduct and stating their doctrine. 
My attentTon is again awakened to the trmhs they 
deliver. I ask, whether they be difFcrent from those 
plain, but divine, principles I have before heard from 
their lips? I ask, whether they now begin, after 

this 



( 27 ) 



thi^ further effusion of the spirit, to incorporate with 
them other sublime mysteries, about which they had 
before been silent ? The answer I receive is, that 
Peter and the other apostles, said — the God of our 
*^ fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged 
*' on a tree : him hath God exalted with his right 
hand, to be a prince and a saviour, to give repent- 
ancc to Israel, and forgiveness of sins ; and we are 
" his witnesses of these things, and so also is the 
holy spirit which God hath given to them that 
obey him." Still the same Unitarian principles, 
and these only, form the subjects of the apostle's 
preaching; which is concisely expressed in the 42n(l 
Verse, by saying : Daily in the temple, and in every 
house they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus^ 
the Messiah;" i\ e. that Jesus was the Messiah. 
The supremacy of God the father, the humanity of 
Jesus, as a man crucified, his character as one exalted 
to be a prince and a saviour, are the doctrines of this 
discourse : and on the ground of these plain doctrines, 
the simple facts^ unaided by the influence of those 
principles which form the Calvinistic or trinitarian 
system, as I learn from v. 1, of the next chapter, 
the number of the disciples in those days were multi- 
plied. This was the doctrine then, that converted 
the world. Yet I am advanced no farther than the 
Unitarian creed leads me. 

The following chapters, viz, the 7th and Sth, 
c2 place 



( 28 ) 

place us, with Stephen, before the council, to heat 
his defence of the christian faith, and to witness his 
martyrdom. His discourse is a brief review of the 
<:onduct of the God of glory to the Jewish nation, 
and before he could enter upon the principles of 
Christianity, he is interrupted by his hearers and 
hurried away to death. [He was stoned invoking 
*^ and saying. Lord Jesus receive my spirit : and 
he kneeled down and cried with a loud voice, 
*^ Lordy lay not this sin to their charge'' This 
proto-martyr was favoured with new and signal 
manifestations of the character and glory of his 
master, to support him in the moment of suffering. 
A supernatural vision was displayed before him. He 
saw the glory of God, some sensible token of the 
divine presence, and Jesus^ standing at the right 
hand of God. It was natural for him to commend 
his spirit to that Jesus, for whose sake he was then 
expiring;" and whom, if not at that instant visible 
to him, he had immediately before seen, represented 
in a state of high dignity and exaltatibn ; and as 
to the prayer for his enemies, his using the word 
Lordy by no means implies that it was directed to 
Christ ; this is a title by which the great God 
himself, whose glory he saw, is generally addressed* 

Doddridge's translation. There is no word in the original to 
answer to the word, God^ supplied by our ttanslatorS; as appears by 
its being printed in Italic] 

« The 



( 29 ) 



The case of Stephen was a peculiar one*.'* 
While his language was expressive of his ideas con- 
cerning the character of Christ, the form into which 
it was cast, was the effect of the presence of Christ 
with him in vision. It arose from the impulse and 
influence of extraordinary circumstances. It was. 
not the language of one instructing others, with a 
view to bring them to the same sentiments he him- 
self held, nor was it followed, as far as we can find^ 
with any conviction in the minds of those who heard 
him, thus expressing himself.] Here thenf I meet 
with nothing directly to our argument, except, that 
the divine being is uniformly spoken of as one person. 

The eighth chapter records, in general terms only, 
the preaching of Philip to the city of Samaria, and 
the conversation he had with the pious eunuch of 
Ethiopia : in each case faith and conversion were 
produced. But I am led to conclude, that the same 
general, Unitarian, principles were the grounds on 
which the&e excellent effects arose ; for I am not 
informed of any other principles having been, on 
either occasion, inculcated. That Jesus is the Christ, 
the Son of God, was the simple principle on which 

Cornish's judicious tract, entitled A Letter to the Right 
" Reverend the Lord Bishop of Carlisle," 1777, p. 23, 4.] 

[f ^' Dr. Teulmin finds Stephen before the council^ but makes 
*^ no mention of his death, in which he is described as praying ta 
" Christ, saying, Lcrd Jesus nccive my spirit. — Lord., lay not this sin 

to their charge.'* Mr. Fuller's " Socinianism Indefensible;" p. 47 •] 



( 30 ) 

the eunuch was baptized ; and of the Samaritans it 
is said, that, when they believed Philip preaching 
the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the 
name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men 
and women. I am not authorised, therefore, to 
suppose, that the tenor of his discourses, though 
successful, w^as different from those of Peter on 
former occasions. 

[It calls for our attention, here, that the Apostles-, 
in all their sermons, as the reader, on consulting 
The Acts for himself, will perceive, did not extend 
tlie term Son of God to a higher character than 
that of a Man, ^' approved of God by signs and 
miracles, and whom God had raised from the 
dead, made Lord and Christ, a Prince and Sa- 
viour, and ordained to be judge of the world/' 
To these views they confine the delineation of the 
character which they exhibit. They neither declare, 
that this name implies true Godhead, nor do they 
connect with it any attributes, to lead us to under- 
stand it, as implying this. There are passages, 
which specify the grounds and reasons on which the 
name is properly applied to JesuSi But what ate 
these grounds ? They are the miraculous conces- 
sion, Luke i. 31—35 ; the most plentiful measure 
of the gifts of the holy spirit conferred on Jesus, 
John i. 14, ch, iii, 34, ch. x. 36 ; his resurrection 
from the dead, Rom. i. 3,4; and his exaltation to 
universal dominion and authority, John iii. 35 ; ch. 



t 31 } 

V, 21, 22 ; Ephes. i. 19, 20 ; Heb. I 2 ; ch, in. B-, 
6 '^. These reasons, so far from implying an equar 
lity with God, the Father, are totally incompatible 
with such a principle. Tiiey plainly express a 
subordinate character, dependence and derived 
powers. The name, Son of Godj^ says the excel- 
lent and candid Dr. Watts, is often used in the 
Bible : but it is never once used, that I can find^ 
^' to signify true and eternal Godhead, And 
therefore, when Christ is called eminently and 
absolutely the Son of God, the meaning of it 
does not necessarily rise higher, than that He Is 
" the most eminent of all other beings (men or 
angels) that are called the So?is of Godf.^^ The 
Jews, it is true, charged Christ with making himself 
equal with God. But this was a malignant con- 
struction of his words ; and our Lord inhis reply shews 
that it was not justly grounded on his words ; or on the 
name, Son of God. Johnx. 34,5, 6. Jesus answered 
them. Is it not written in your law, / said^ Ye are 
Gods? Ifhe called //^6^7?^ Gods, unto whom the word 
" of God came, and the scripture can not be broken^: 
" Say ye of him whom the Father hath sanctified, 
and sent into the world. Thou blasphemest, be- 
cause I said,. / am the Smi of Godf Jesus 

See the illustration of these reasons in Lardner's Sermons, 
vol 2, p. 175 — 186 i his Letter on the Logos," p. 30, &c, 
i2mo. edit. Watts's " Important Questions," p. 11 — 16. Chris- 
tie's " Discourses on the Divine Unity," p. 5O— 56.] 

[f Important Questions," p. 8.] 

c 4 himself 



/ 



( 32 ) 

himself placeth the propriety of the name, not on his 
equaHty with God, the Father ; but on his being 
sanctified and sent into the world. It is evident 
from various instances of the conduct of the Apostles 
towards their Lord, that they did not understand him 
as professing or claiming the character of the true 
God, by assuming this title, Son of God : as when 
they rebuked him ; when they questioned his know- 
ledge of some things ; when they wondered, and 
Vv'ere astonished at his working miracles. 

The terms, Christ and Son of God are equivalent, 
and used one for the other, as appears from Matt, 
xxvi. 63 ; Luke xxii. 66, 70 ; John i. 34 — 39 ; ch. 
xi. 27 ; ch. xx. 31. Peter's applauded confession 
of Christ's character is in these words : " Thou art 

the Christ, the Son of the living God." So also 
John vi. 69, We believe and are sure, that thou 
^' art the Christ, the Son of the living God." But 
in Mark viii. 29, it is, " Thou art the Christ of 
" God :" and Luke ix. 20, " The Christ of God." 
The name. Son of God., bears therefore the same 
sense in the mouths of the Apostles as<it doth in the 
writings of modern Unitarians. The faith on which 
the former baptized converts, is the same principle, 
which the latter contend is the one fundamental 
doctrine of Christianity. They look upon them« 
selves as speaking and acting, in this instance, under 
high authority : under the authority of the uniform 
language of the New Testament : under the sanction 

of 



( 33 } 

of die approved confession of Peteiv on which the 
christian church was to be built*. 

This explanation of the name, Son of God, is 
confirmed by what occurs in the next, the 9th chap- 
ter ; nay, what occurs there tends to establish the 
view wdiich has been given, from the preceding 
chapters, of the doctrine taught by the Apostles. It 
relates the manner of Saul's conversion to the faith 
of Christ, and the grounds on w^hich he commenced 
a preacher of that gospel, the believers in w^hich he 
had persecuted. This remarkable change took place, 
even when he w^as executing a commission to bind 

all that called on the name of Jesus V. e, all the 
disciples of Christ. To call on the name of Christ'* 
is, say the critics, to give up his nam.e to Christ, and 
to profess himself his disciple f. . This is a just and 
grammatical sense of the words. The phrase was 
used w^ith peculiar piopriety at that time to point 
ou-t the disciples of Christ : for the chief priests had 
forbidden any one to name Christ, or to pi*each and 
i?peak in his name ; ch. iv. 17, 18 ; John ix. 22o 
Hence it was a mark of discipleship to avow his 
name J : it was strongly expressive both of attach- 
ment and fortitude in those who professed it ; . a 
sign that they gloried in it. 

Watts's Important Questions," p. 9.] 
[f Du Veil in loc, : and Leigh's Critica Sacra.] ] 
[-1 Calvin, as quoted by Engedinus 1 Gor. i. 2.] 



f 34 j 

Against such Saul was armed with power d.nd 
authority ; when, by an extraordinary step of divine 
providence and the vision of Jesus, he was stopped 
in his career, awakened to see his error, and brought 
over to the faith he persecuted. Immediately after 
this change, produced by a miraculous process, he 
became a zealous advocate for the gospel. The fol- 
lowing chapters of the Acts of the Apostles are 
filled, principally, with a narrative of his labours and 
a detail of his sermons. 

In this chapter the general substance of his preach- 
ing is, concisely and summarily, stated : and, though 
no particular instances of its success are enumerated, 
it deserves notice in the argument I am discussing. 

Straightway," saith the historian, he preached 

Christ:" or, as some Mss. and all the antient ver- 
sions read it, he preached Jesus, in the synagogues, 

that He was the Son of God '^ or, as it is ex-- 
pressed v. 22, '^proving, that this Is the very Christ." 
It appears that the terms> Christ and Son of God, 
are used, here, as equivalent ; as of the same import. 
This is the pojnt which this recent convert to Chris- 
tianity labours to establish by weighty and solid 
arguments : namely, That Jesus was the Messiah, 
or Christ, 1'his principle was the grand subject of 
the commission he had received. This was the 
doctrine he was, as *^ a chosen vessel, to bear," or 

See Le Clerc— Dr. Har wood's edition of the Greek Testament, 
and Mr« Wakefield'5 TransUtioOj Note in loc] 

preachy 



( 35 ) 



preach, before the Gentiles, to the kings and the 
children of Israel." It is remarkable that, in 
making this truth the leading subject of his preach- 
ing, he did not adopt his plan of preaching from 
Peter and those who had been, already, laying the 
foundation of the christian church, but acted under 
special direction from Christ Jesus. Gal. i. 12, 13. 
If we may judge of the instructions, which Paul 
received from Christ himself, by the subsequent 
strain of his preaching,- the substance of which is 
given in the passage before us, he was not directed 
to touch, much less to enlarge, upon those points 
which have been represented by Mr. Fuller as neces- 
sary and essential to the conversion of sinners*.] 

I' next 

The preceding paragraphs are meant to apply to the following, 
animadversions of Mr. Fuller, p. 47. 9 : In preaching to the Jew>s, 
the Apostles insisted that Jesus was the Christ, the promised Messiah^ 
the Son of God ; resting the proof of these assertions upon the fact 
that God had raised him from the dead : Snd Dr. Toulmin reckons 
this to be ' what in modern style is Called Unitarianism.' But 
this is proceeding too fast. Before such a conclusion can be fairly 
*^ drawn, it must be proved that these propositions have the sams 

meaning in the Socinian creed, as in that of the Apostles. If 

Christ, in professing to be the S^n of God^ professed to be equal 
zuith Gdd; and if his countrymen generally so understood him, 
and therefore accused him of ^/<2i"/72.^w2jy, and put him to death t 
then it is not true, that the Apostles could use these terms in the 
*♦ sense of our opponents; and Dr. Toulmin's conclusion is alto- 
gether unfounded. 
Why does he," i.e. Dt. Toulmin, asks Mr. Fuller, skip over 
^ the uiutb chapterj which gives accQliat of th^ conversion of 
^ 6 



( 36 ) 



1 next meet with this Apostle receiving an extra- 
ordinary commission to preach unto Cornelius and 
his house, the words whereby he and all his house 
should be saved. Acts. x. 14. I am all attention on 
an occasion so singular and solemn. Peter delivers 
his message : and this is the word, which he saith, 
*^ God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching 
peace by Jesus Christ, (he is Lord of all,) which 
" was published throughout all Judea and began 
^' from Galilee, after the baptism which John 
preached, namely, how God anointed Jesus of 
Nazareth, with the holy spirit and with power, 
^' who went about doing good and healing all that 
^' were oppressed with the devil : for God was with 
him. Him whom the Jews slew, and hanged 
upon a tree, God raised up the third day and 
shewed him openly — and he commanded us to 
preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he 
who was ordained of God to be the judge of the 
quick and the dead ; to him give all the prophets 

Saul ? Was it because we there find the primitive christians 
s« described as calling upon the name of the Lord Jesus ? (ver. 14, 21.)** 

Socinianism Indefensible." p. 47. It might have sufficed to 

reply to this question, that the ninth chapter did not furnish any 
instances of conversions effected by the preaching of the Apostles. 
Saul was converted by the appearance of Christ himself to Him> 
But the remarks on the chapter above may convince Mr. Fuller^ 
that I did not pass it over from any apprehension, that it contained 
declarations which I was afraid to meet ; or v/hich I was desirous 
of coucctiling from the reader.^ 

witness, 



( 37 ) 

witness, that through his name whosoever be- 
heveth in him shall receive remission of sins." 
The same doctrine, I perceive, as before. No inti- 
mation about a trinity? a satisfaction to the divine 
justice, the godhead of Christ, and other opinions, 
which form the Calvinistic creed : and yet, besides 
the conversion of all who heard this to the faith 
of Christ, there was a remarkable and miraculous 
Sanction given to it from Heaven, for while Peter 
was speaking the holy spirit fell on all them who 
heard the word. Was not this a divine attestation 
to the truth and siifficiency of his doctrine ; a proof 
that he delivered the w'hole counsel of God, so far 
as it was necessary to the salvation of his audience ? 
But I meet here with none of those doctrines, which 
you. Sir, conceive, are a necessary foundation for 
faith and repentance. I meet with none but such 
which, as an Unitarian, I embrace and rejoice in 
with devout gladness. 

The eleventh and twelfth chapters furnish nothing 
to the point before us, except that they who wxre 
scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose 
about Stephen, travelling to a distance, it is said, 
preached the word ; and some of them spake unto 
the Grecians, preaching the Lord Jesus^' These 
are general expressions, and the only clue to their 
meaning and importance, is the discourses which we 
have reviewed ; and v/hich afford nothing to justify 

such 



f 3S ) 

such a construction of them, as your creed might 
dispose you to put on them. 

A new character next appears in the kingdom of 
Christ, espousing his cause with pecuhar ardor, and 
acting under a singular commission ; even he, to 
whom " it was given to preach among the Gentiles, 
*V the unsearchable riches of Christ;" I mean the 
apostle Paul. 

But here let us pause. 

I am, Reverend Sir, 

Respectfully, Your's^ &^?>. 



LETTEB; 



( 39 ) 



LETTER TIL 

Reverend Sir, 

FOLLOWING the narrative of the historian, I 
accompany the apostle Paul, preaching in the syna- 
gogue of Antioch, addressing first the Jews and then 
the Gentiles ; calling the former to give audience, he 
glances at the leading events in their history, and then 
advances this principle; that God, according to 
" HIS promlvSe, had raised unto Israel, a Saviour 
*^ Jesus; that, though they had found no cause of 
death in him, yet they desired Pilate, that he 
should be slain ; that God raised him from the 
dead, and in this had fulfilled the promises he had 
*^ made unto the fathers ; that through this man was 
preached the forgiveness of sins ; and bv him all 
that believed were justified from all things, from 
which they could not be justified by the law of 
Moses." This doctrine he called the word ^' of 
** salvationJ*^ The Gentiles besought that these 
words might be preached unto them the next 
Sabbath-day. On hearing this doctrine, many of the 
Jews, and religious proselytes followed Paul and 
Barnabas, and the Gentiles were glad and glorified 
the word of the Lord." But where, I ask here 
also, are those principles which Mr. Fuller apprehends 
ar^ essential to coayersion ? if the apostle preached 

them^ 



( 40 ) 

them, where Is the sincerity of the historian, in not 
recording those parts of his discourse ? If the apostle 
did not insist on them, why should it be expected 
that I or any other Unitarian should urge them, in 
order to turn a sinner from the error of his way ? 
May we not hope, that we shall be the happy and 
honoured instruments of building up the church of 
God ? may we not hope that our preaching w^ill not 
be deficient in point of doctrine, of that doctrine 
which is the means of turning others to righteous- 
ness, if we adhere simply to the plan on which the 
apostle of the Gentiles preached ; he who was sent 
to be salvation unto the ends of the earth ? To 
effect the great ends of his ministry the topics om 
which he dwelt were such as are now called Uni- 
tarian doctrines: and by these topics the great ends 
of his ministry wsi^e effected. 

In the synagogue of Thessalonica the apostle pur- 
sues the same strain ; opening and alleging, " that 

Christ must needs have suffered and have riseiv 

again, and that this Jesus ' w^hom I preach unto 
^' you, is Christ." Here the idea given of the per- 
son of Christ is that of a suffering according to^ 
the counsels and purpose of God, and raised again 
to attest his character as the Christ. On this sim- 
ple Unitarian principle ''some believed and consorted- 

with Paul and Silas, alid of the devout Greeks a 
*' great multitude, and of the chief women not a 

«few-'^ 



( 41 ) 

few." This doctrine, it appears, did affect and 
interest their minds. 

I then attend the Apostle preaching, before the 
supreme council, in affairs of state, at Athens ; as 
illustrious a court as the world ever exhibited, but 
in need of every divine instruction, being idolaters, 
greatly addicted to superstition : and to whom those 
principles which you reckon so essential to the con- 
version of mankind would, on account of their 
novelty, be peculiarly important and acceptable ; 
for " the Athenians and strangers there, spent their 
time in nothing else but either to tell or hear some 
new thing." It was an inviting opportunity for 
the Apostle to be full and explicit in his instructions. 
Here I should expect to hear the Apostle, had he 
known the system or entered into the views on 
which they have acted, preaching agreeably to the 
model of the Edwards, the Tennants, and the Fullers 
of later times. If he did it, I cannot learn it from 
the christian historian. He informs us no more, than 
that upon occasion of an altar dedicated to the 
UNKNOWN God, Paul said, " Whom ye ignorantly 
worship, him declare I unto you, God who made 
the world and all things therein, seeing that he is 
Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples 
made with hands ; forasmuch then as we are the 
^' offspring of God, we ought not to think that the 
godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, 
graven by art or man's device ; and the times of 

" thk 



( 42 ) 

<^ this ignorance God winked at ; but now com- 
mandeth all men every where to repent ; because 
he hath appointed a day, in which he will judge 
the world in righteousness by that man, whom 
^« HE hath ordained ; whereof he hath given as- 
<^ surance unto ail men, in that he hath raised hun 
^* from the dead," Here the godhead is spoken of 
as we would speak of one intelligent being, the per- 
sonal pronouns he and him^ of the singular number, 
are appropriated to him ; and Christ is spoken of as 
a MAN, whom he raised from the dead, and wha 
hath a commission to judge the world. The doc- 
trine is pure Unitarianism. Yet this plain doctrine, 
these simple facts, had a great effect : for, though 
some mocked, certain believed and clave unto 
the preacher ; or were converted by a strain of 
preaching in your opinion, Sir, totally inadequate to 
the effect really produced by it. But, in the review 
of this event, I am ready to say, after the Apostle, 
the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and 
*^ the weakness of God is stronger than men.'* 
1 Cor. i. 25. 

In the progress of his ministry, after this, Paul is 
found at Corinth. He taught at this place, that "Jesus 
was the Christ." Ch. xviii. 5. This was the subject, 
the sole subject of the preaching of ApoUos at Ephe- 
sus, " who was mighty in the scriptures." The effect 
wrought in each case was remarkable : in the former, 
while the Jews opposed themselves aud blasphemed, 

Crispus. 



( 43 ) 

Crlspus with all his house believed on the Lord, and 
many of the Corinthians, hearing, believed : " in 
the latter the preacher "mightily convinced the Jews.'* 
We read nothing of sentiments^ corresponding to the 
Calvinistic and trinitarian schemes, having been taught 
in either place. If you suppose, Sir, that these sen- 
timents were inculcated and blended with the great 
truth, the Messiahship of Jesus, it is supposit ion only, 
which is not supported by the testimony of the histo- 
rian, nor by the practice of the apostolical preachers 
on any other occasion. You may build on supposi- 
tions ; but I must be allowed to adhere to what is 
written, and to conclude that the historian has not kept 
back and suppressed any thing necessary to afford us 
a complete idea of the substance of the discourses of 
the apostles, or of what was essential to the wonder- 
ful ejfFect they produced. 

The following chapter relates a singular circum- 
stance. Paul finds certain disciples at Ephesus, some 
who were members of the newly erected kingdom 
of God ; but, as he discovered on enquiry, they 
were so in an imperfect and defective manner; " they 
" had been baptized intojohn's baptism only, and ha,d 
not so much as heard that there was any holy spi- 
rit /. 6^ " any gifts of it given to men and received 
by them*.'' What is the instruction afforded in 

this 

*■ They could not mean, that they had never heard of the holy 
^licstj for John had taught his followers, that Jesus was to baptise- 

with 



( 44 ) 

tills case ? Merely similar to those advanced on former 
occasions* They are informed^ that they should be- 
lieve on hinij which was to come after John, viz. on 
Jesus Christ : or on Jesus, the Christ. But still how 
far this minister of Christ fell short of that standard of 
faith, by which you conceive conversion is to be ef- 
fected, even when he designedly applies himself to 
make up what was lacking in the faith of some 1 And 
this maimed, defective representation of the gospel, 
as it would probably be called, if coming from the 
lips of 7nodern Unitarians, is owned by Heaven : for 
Paul laying his hands upon these disciples, the holy 
*' ghost came upon them : they spake with tongues 
and prophesied." 

[The next, i, e, the 20th chapter presents us with 
the fine speech of the apostle to the elders at Ephesus. 
In this there is a clause, which glances at the charac- ' 
ter of Christ and the operations of his ministry and 
death in a language, that hath not occurred in the 
former a^uotations, 2. e, v. 28. Where the apostle 
exhorts the elders to feed the church of God, wbich 

Pie hath purchased with his own blood." But 
whatever be the true and accurate reading in this place, 
for it is different in different manuscripts and versions ; 
and w^hatever be the force and meaning of the word, 

with the holy ghost. Matt. iii. ii. and Luke iii. 16. And by the^ 
holy ghost is meant the gifts of it. Gh. viii. 15. 17. 18. 19. Bp. Pearce 
in loc. The Cambridge ms. reads, h irxji-ux^ ayioy. "Kai/.^ccvovcri, ^-tiys; 
'L *'that any had, received, the holy^spirit.'* 

purchase^ 



( 45 ) 



purchase^ in this incidental sentence, as it Joes not 
occur in a discourse addressed, either to Jews or Gen- 
tiles with a design to bring them over to the faith 
of Je«us, nor was followed with any instance of a con- 
version to it ; I should be justified in still omitting it, 
as not falling in with my plan, which is to review 
those discourses only, that were delivered with the 
design of converting men to the christian faith, and 
were actually effectual to that purpose. It conveys 
undoubtedly, a sentiment true in itself, and strictly 
conformable to those vtews, which the apostle gave 
of the christian doctrine, when he '^preached Jesus? 
proving that He was the Christ*." In the discourse 

that 

" They'* i. e. the apostles, " declared that by the shedding oF 
his blood his church xx)as purchased.'' " VV^hy does he," i. e, Dr 
Toulmin^ " make mention of the fine speech of the apostle Paul to 
*' the elders of the church. at Ephesus, and yet overlook that solemn 
charge, • Feed the church of God which he hath purchased zuith his otj&n 
blood,' Is it because he thinks with Dr. Priestley, ' that we.otight 
to be exceedingly cautious, how we admit such an expression 
^' That seems to be the reason. But then we ought to be as cautious 
*' how we admit the book which contains dt," Fuller's " Socinianism 
Indefensible. '*page 45, 47, Yes; I do think with Dr. Priestley, and 
thought so before I knew it to be a sentiment expressed by him> 
that we ought to be exceedingly cautious, how we admit such an 
expression, as the bUod of God. It is a phrase which occurs no where 
else in the scriptures. In the strict and literal sense it can not be true 
-of the Being who is a Spirit, The mind, which conceives worthily 
of the eternal Jehovah, revolts from it However some may be recon* 
^iled to it, Chrysostom and Athanasius, those great patrons of ortho- 
iloxyj in the fourth century, as well as Drigen, reprobated the lan- 
guage 



( 46 ) 



that now ofFers to examination, there is a declaration, 
which] increases my surprise at this wonderful silence, 

that 

guage as shocking. If the common reading be admitted, it must be 
understood as meaning, according to the gloss of Erasmus, Du Veil 
and other learned men, the blood which God gave for the salvation 
of the world; the blood of his Son, Christ Jesus. For God so loved 
*' the world that he gave his only begotten Son to die for us.* 
But can Mr Fuller be ignorant, that whether the books of the Act^ 
criginally contained such an expression, is a doubtful matter ? Bu 
Veil observes, on the authority of Beza, that five copies which fel^ 
under the examination of that reformer, had it ** the church of the 
•* Lord and of God and that many other Greek copies have only 
cfthe Lord. The most ancient Syriac version reads, the Church of Christ, 
How can this passage, then, be quoted as militating with the repre- 
sentations I have given of the tenor of the Apostles' preaching : or 
as teaching the doctrine of the deity of Christ ? A passage the com- 
mon reading of which is by no means proved to be aathentic ; or 
wbich, if it were so, admits an easy, rational interpretation, with- 
out being supposed to convey the ascription of gross, material blood 
to the eternal spirit ? But, in this sentence, Mr. Fuller finds the doc" 
trine of the atonement. He appears to have been misled by the sound 
and import of the English word, purchase^ which carries in it the idea 
of paying a price, or an equivalent. But the word, in the original, 
TTf^jTroifw, and the substantive derived from it, mean only to acquirS 
and obtain, or acquisition and obtaining. It is rendered by this last 
term by our translators, i Thcss. v. ** For God hath not appoint. 
" ed us to wrath, but to obtain^ ^t^iiTOkna-iv^ salvation by our Lord 
Jesus Christ.*' 2 Thess. ii. 14. Whereunto he called you by our 
gospel, to the obtaining^ 11% ni^ir^Qincra^ of the glory of our Lord 
** Jesus Christ," 1 Tim. iii. 14. *'They that use the office of a dca- 
con well purchase," according to Dr.Doddridge,j&mwrf,'^ffi7roioi/v7a<> 
to themselves a good degree.'* He then, that friend and saviour* 
** who gave himself to redeem us, from all iniquity, and to purify 
unto himself, a peculiar people, zealous of good worksj" may 

with 



( 47 ) 



that I notice in all the discourses of tlie apostle, on 
those points which you consider as so necessary to the 
sticcess of preaching He appeals to those elders, 
that he had kept back nothing that was profitable, 
\\ 20. Wherefore I take you to record this day^ 
that I am pure from the blood of all men ; for I 
have not shunned to declare to you the whole 
counsel of God." v. 27. How could this have been 
said, if those principles on which you place so great 
a stress are parts of the counsel of God ? Or^ if the 
apostle had preached on these topics, how could the 
historian, when he came to record this solemn appeal, 
fail to recollect, that he made a very defective report 
of the apostle's sermons ? The imputation of such a 
neglect and omission can not be admitted against the 
sacred historian, even by those who do not consider 
Tiim as writing under a divine inspiration. It would 
be great irreverence towards the spirit of truth in 
those to allow it, who conceive that the holy spirit 
dictated to the historian the facts and discourses he 

with the greatest propriety, with strict truth, be said to have "/yr« 
chased the church.** He hath given it an existence. He hath ac- 
quired it to himself, by his blood ; by the labours of his ministry as 
"well as by the sufferings of his cross. The church is his purckase^y 
acquired, possession : Eph. i. 14. It is his peculiar people;** 
X«9;fijfl£^;7:oi>icriv; a '* peogle of acquisition ;** Vulgate : " a people 
whom God claims as his. own.** Beza : "Having redeemed it not 
with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from their vain convert 
<• sation, but with the precious bleod of Christ. '* a Pet. «. 9. chap. i. 
19.] 

should 



f 48 ) 



should record for the instruction of future ages of the 
christian church. My respect for the writer of the 
Acts, my piety will not permit me to" suppose, that 
the only memoirs we have of the first planting of the 
gospel could be so exceedingly deficient, so totally 
fail to inform us of the essential parts of discourses 
which converted the sinner, and christianised the 
world. 

It confirms me in the persuasion, that there is no 
such omission in the narrative of the historian, that 
in relating the speech of Paul to Agrippa, ch. xxvi^ 
in which the apostle gives an account of his hfe, 
conversion and labours, when he comes to the sub- 
jects of his preaching, all that he says is, " Having 
obtained help of God, I continue unto this day, 
<^ witnessing both to small and great, saying none 
other things than those which the Prophets and 
Moses did say, should come, that Christ should 
suffer, and that he should be the first that should ' 
rise from the dead, and should shew light unto the 
people, and to the Gentiles.'* V. 22, 23. It 
appears from this, if his representation of his own 
preaching is true and faithful, or if the historian has 
truly reported his word, that he never touched on . 
the doctrine of the trinity, or the godhead of Christ, 
on the atonement, or the satisfaction made by his 
death to divine justice. This is the more remarkable, 
because, according to what he declares, v. 18, the 
great aiid interesting objects of his ministry, the 




( 49 ) 

purposes which he was sent to efFect, were to open 
the eyes of the Gentiles, and to turn them from 
*^ darkness to light, and from the power of Satan 
unto God, that they might receive the forgiveness 
of sins, and inheritance among them that arc 
^' sanctified by faith that is in Christ Jesus." 

[The circumstances of Paul's voyage to Rome 
form the narrative of the next chapter. In the 
xxviii. we find the apostle, after having been ship- 
wrecked on the shore of Malta, arrived at the empo- 
rium of the world, and made a prisoner in his own 
house. In this situation he sought, and embraced, 
all opportunities of promoting the gospel of his di- 
vine Master. As many, at different tim^es, came to 
him to his lodgings, " he expounded and testified 
the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning 
^' Jesus, both out of the law of Moses and out of the 
" Prophets, from mornipg till evening." V. 23, 
On liis fiist explanation of tlie christian doctrine, 
some believed the things which were spoken." 
He continued this course for two years, and re- 
*l ceived all tha,t came in unto liim ; preaching the 
kingdom of God, and teaching those things, whxich 
concern the Lord Jesus Christ, with all conr.dence, 
^ no man forbidding him." In consequence of 
this many converts vvere made to Christianity. This 
^^acount of the apostle's strain of preaching is very 
general ; except that, when some of the Jews, on 
their first interview with the apostle, believed 



( 50 ) 



not/' but rejected the gospel, amidst all the evi- 
dence he advanced in favour of it, from Moses and 
the Prophets, the historian tells us, he declared, that 
the salvation of God was sent unto the Gentiles, 
and that they would hear it." V. 28. This is 
the only instance, in which the historian particularises 
the apostle's preaching. Divines, who did not read 
the Acts with that intention, with which I have now 
reviewed it, have seen the matter in the same lights 
in which it appears to my mind. Probably, as Mr, 
Cradock well observes,'* says Dr. Doddridge, '*the 
apostle insisted on two topics ; — tl^at the kingdom 
of God, which they had so long expected, was of a 
spiritual nature ; — and that Jesus of Nazareth, in 
whose name he preached, was the person foretold 
*^ as the promised Messiah, and Lord of that king- 
'^^ dom*." Neither of these critics, with a strong- 
bias in favour of those sentiments, could find here 
the doctrines of original sin, of the deity of Christ, 
■^nd of the imputation of his righteousness ; so essen- 
tial, in Mr. Fuller's opinion, to the faithful preach* 
5ng, and to the ciEcacy, of Christianity. Here, again, 
is a perfect silence on these points. Yet the doc- 
trine, the simple doctrine of the divine Messiahship of 
Jesus is successful: and the proofs adduced for it reach 
the heart with energy : Some believed."] *^ 

I may applaud, Sir, the piety, the zeal, the good 
intentions, with which the Moravian preachers, oi 

[* Doddridge's Family Expositor, vol, 3, ch. 28, Note (b).] 

th^ 



( 51 ) 

ihe Elliots, or yourself, might address the heathen^ 
of Greenland, or America, on the fall and corruption 
of nature through Adam, on the Creator's taking 
upon him human nature and dying for our sins ; but 
I do not see such a mode of preaching followed by 
those who first embarked in the glorious and philan- 
thropic employment of converting the world to the 
faith of Christ. They, I J)resume5 were fully in^ 
Btructed in the mind of Christ, adopted the most 
proper means of accomplishing their embassy, and 
have furnished, for future ages, true specimens of the 
christian faith, and divine models of preaching it. 

I repeat it again ; and leave it, Sir, for your con* 
sideratioil, that I can find no other doctrine, in all 
the pieceding discourses whicli have now passed un^ 
der our review, but what is, in modern style, called 
the Unitarian doctrine. This is that word of 

God," that " gospel," that made both Jews a3)d 
Gentiles believers and members of the church of 
Christy '' purifying their hearts," Acts xv. 9. And 
carrying with it, '' remission of sins," ch. x. 43* 
The matter hath, for many years, appeared to me in 
this light. I'he conviction produced, by rea.ding 

the Acts of the Apostles," both of the truth and 
efficacy of Unitarian principles, the conviction that 
these were the principles by w^hicli the world was 
converted, on which christian chinxhes were found-*' 
ed, is so strong that I cannot resist it. 

Here is a proper place to relieve your attentionj 

D 2 and 



( ^2 ) 

and that of the reader. With a just esteem for' your 
abilities and piety, 

I am, Sir, 

Your^s, &c. 



Appendix 



{ ) 



tAFPENDlX TO LETTER ITT. 

It appeared to me sufficient to establish the ^omt 
for which I argued, to confine myself to the Acts of 
the apostles, as exhibiting the principles which the 
apostles preached, with the design of making coia^ 
verts to christian truth and piety: and as fully dis- 
playing the success and efficacy of those principles. 
But I would embrace the opportunity which offer^'^ 
from presenting this argument again to the public, 
to take a wider scope^ and extend my review of the 
doctrine taught by the apostles, through the epistles 
to Timothy and Titus. I fix on these epistles, be- 
cause they appear to have a peculiar connection with 
the acts of the apostles. In the latter we, as it wei'e, 
hear those holy men themselves teaching the way of 
salvation : in the former we expect to find ins true-* 
tions, concerning the most useful way of preaching, 
given to those who were to enter into their labours 
and carry on that noble work of converting the world, 
which, after the resurrection of Christ, had com- 
menced with them. On this account these epistles 
are peculiarly to our purpose : for they were written 
to two young ministers of Christianity, to supplvi 
diem with rules for the discharge of the duties of 
D 3 tirar 



( 54 ) 

their olEce, and to furnish them with principles of 
divine truth to communicate to those ministers and 
officers in the christian church, whom they should 
ordain in every city. 

You, Sii% it is presumed, will readily admit, that 
the tenor of the doctrine they should disseminate and 
commit to others, would, naturally, form part of the 
advice contained in letters written to such characters. 
Ir is well known, what share the principles they are 
to preach have in the charges delivered by us to 
young ministers, on forming the pastoral relation. 
These epistles were written by one who was deeply 
engaged in spreading pure Christianity, and to those 
whose province It was to plant as well as to water 
the churches. They were written in the con- 
fidence of friendsliip, and with the warmth of 
afFection, We may, therefore, reasonably expect 
to find the apostle disclosing his sentiments, with« 
out disguise or reserve, on matters of importance to 
tlieir fidelity, and to the success of their preaching. 
This expectation ariseth from the declaration of the ' 
apostle, that he wrote to Timothy, that ^' he might 
^' know how to behave himself in the housaof God, 
which is the church of the living God, the pillar 
and ground of truth. This expectation is justi- 
fied, is confiniied, when on opening these epistles we 
meet repeatedly with a general advice to preserve 
purity and truth in their preaching. This is not 
only recommended, bur earnestly urged on t]iem» 
It is charged on Timothy, I Epist. iv. 16, To take 

heed 



( 55 ) 

*^ heed to himself and his doctrine : for In so doing,' ' 
saith the apostle, ^' thou shalt both save thyself and 
them that hear thee^" He is solemnly warned to 
*' keep the commandment without spot, unrebukable^ 
until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ.'^ 
He is exhorted to hold '^fast the form of sound words, 
and to study to show himself a workman, that 
need not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the woid 
of truth/* 2 Epist, i. 13. ii. 15. The admonition 
addressed to Titus is " to speak the things which 
" become sound doctrine ; shov/ing in doctrine 
uncorruptness, gravity and sincerity.'' 
These circumstances give one reason to suppose, 
that the apostle, in wTiting to these youthful preach- 
ers and advocates of Christianity, would not fail to 
urge them to insist on such topics, as were most 
essential to the success of their labours. With this 
expectation I peruse these epistles ; I examine them 
from chapter to chapter, from paragraph to para- 
graph. No trace of tke trinitarian scheme offers to 
my inspection. No such chain of Calvinistic prin- 
ciples, as you, Sir, think necessary to be insisted on, 
presents itself to my review. When I look over a 
scheme of religious principles, lately drav^^n up as a 
plan according to which certain modern mJssionaries 
proposed to preach to the islanders of the Pacific 
Ocean*, and into which they are to initiate their 



See A. Missionary Voyage to the Southern Pacific Ocean, in 
the ship DufF. 410. Appendix, p. 413—- 42c.] 

B 4 convertSj 



( 56 ) 

converts, and compare this formulary with the epistles 
to Timothy and Titus, I am struck at the diiTerence 
between this and the instructions given to those pri- 
mitive missionaries. Any one, methinks, who cahnly 
, and Cxindidly compares the one with the other, m.ust 
perceive the great difference. If the doctrines, con- 
tained in the former, be not only truths, but divine 
truths, and essential to the conversion of heathens, 
the apostle Paul must have been very deficient in the 
outlines of christian doctrine he gave to those, whom 
lie regarded as stewards of the mysteries of God* 
In point of compass, in point of minuteness, in the 
detail of principles, the apostle, sure, must appear to 
you, if you approve of the scheme put into the liands 
of our missionaries, to come behind those who have 
drawn up that form of doctrine. But no one will, 
I presume, admit an idea so disparaging to the wis- 
dom, the fidelity and attention,^ which we are all 
disposed to asciibe to the apostle. 

His omissions, his silence on the points supposed 
by some so essential to the efficacy of an evangelical 
mission, is more remarkable, because the apostle ap- 
pears to have been particularly solicitous to inculcate 
on the evangelists, Timothy and Titus, a regard to 
sound doctrine, and a strain of preaching, that would 
be most conducive to holy, christian practice. Witli 
this view he warns Timothy against those, who 
turn aside to vain jangling," and to matters " which 
^' minister questions, rather than godly edifying 

against 



( 57 ) 

against^those who give heed to seducing spirits 
against the perverse disputings of men of corrupt 

minds against profane and vain babbhngs and 
" opposition of science, iklsely so called, which some 
"professing have erred concerning, the faith.'' He 
exhorts him to hold faith and a good conscience, 

and to exercise himself unto godliness to turn 
away from such vicious characters as had " the form 
" of godliness, but denied the power of it and to 
watch against the influence of the maxims and ex- 
amples of those, who would '^not endure sound doc- 
" trine." In similar strains doth:he warn and ad- 
monish Titus ; guarding him against those, w^io, 
while they " profess to know God, in v/orks deny 

him, being abominable, disobedient, unto every 
" good work reprobate :'' and recommends it to him, 
to show himself a pattern of good v/orks, sound 

speech that- could- not be condemned,'' and to 

aiBrm constantly the importance and excellence of 
" good wwks as good iu themselves and profitable 
" to me a." 

iigreeably to these general-adm.oniiions he suggests 
to these- young preachers of the gospel, principles 
and rules of a conduct, wholly of a practical and 
moral nature, which they should apply to the differ- 
ent circumstances of those whom they were to ad- 
dress, and to the social and dom.estic relations they' 
filled ; w^hether young or. aged men, rich men or 
servants,-, young women or w^idov/Sj or aged women, 
D 5 I hese 



( 58 ) 

These practical, moral rules of a holy life, even to 
recommending marriage and the use of meats, are 
the doctrines, the fundamental doctrines, which he 
calls on Timothy and Titus diligently to explain and 
earnestly to impress on their hearers : as the particu- 
lars of that sound doctrine, which they were to in- 
culcate. This will obviously appear from reading 
these epistles. 

But there is not a word about the doctrine of the 
trinity, hereditary depravity, and the imputation of 
the righteousness of Christ. The former topics arc 
insisted on and brought into repeated review: but 
the latter are passed over in silence. 

The general representations, which the apostle 
gives concerning the nature and genius of christiani» 
ty, in these epistles, are also of a practical nature, 
without incorporating with his representations of it 
those doctrines which you, Sir, deem so essential to 
the efficacy of preaching. *^ The end of the com- 
mandment is charity, out of a pure heart, and of a 
good conscience, and of faith unfeigned. God 
hath not given us the spirit of fear, but of power, 
and of love, and of a sound mind." He describes 
what he styles " the glorious gospel of the blessed 
«^ God'' to be the truth, which is after godliness,, 
in hope of eternal life, which God that cannot lie 
promised before the world began;" or in other 
words, the true revelation of God's will and grace ta 
jnankindj: enforcing on them the practice of universal 

goodness? 



( 59 ) 

goodness, in hope of immortal life, assured to them 
by the faithful promise of God. And above all wor-^ 
thy of notice is that comprehensive passage : " The 
grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared 
unto all men, teaching them, that denying ungodli- 
ness and worldly lusts they vshould live soberly, righ- 
teously and godly in this present world, looking 
for the blessed hope and glorious appearance of the 
great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ, who gave 
^' himself for us, that he might reedeem us from all 
iniquity and purify us unto himself, a peculiar 
people, zealous of good works." 
I find certain doctrinal principles interspersed-^ 
through these epistles, namely, That it is a faith- 
ful saying, that Jesus Christ came into the world 
5* to save sinners that there is one God, and one 
MediatorbetweenGodandman, the Man Christ 
Jesus ; who gave himself a ransom for all to be 
testified in due time That great is the mystery 
" of godliness, God manifest in the flesh &c. 
That our Saviour, Jesus Christ, hath abolished death 
and brought life and immortality to light by his 
gospel That, Jesus Christ of the seed of David 
was raised from the dead, having given himself for 
us, that he mJght redeem us from all iniquity and 
purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of 
good works ; that we " look for a blessed hope, and 
the glorious appearance of the great God, and of 
our Saviour Jesus Christ that we are saved 
p 6 and-. 



( 60 ) 



and called with a holy calling, not according to 
" our works, not by works of righteousness which 
^' have done ; but according to the mercy of 
* God, by the washing of regeneration and renewing 

of the Holy Ghost, which was shed abundantly 

through Jesus Christ." 

Any Unitarian will adtnit, with devout gladness 
and gratitude, these declarations, without recogni- 
sing in them those ideas, which you, Sir, probably 
affix to some of the terms here used ; without dedu- 
cing from them those tenets which you conceive ought 
to be the great topics of preaching. Yes : the Uni- 
tarian rejoiccth, that Christ Jesus came to save sin- 
ners, to deliver them from ail iniquity, and that 
through Him mercy and peace flow to mankind. 
The Unitarian rejoiceth, that when, for many ages 
before our Saviour appeared, and when he did 
appear, the whole world,' v/ith some few exceptions, 
were sunk in ignorance, corruption and depravity of 
manners ; that, when mankind could not be saved 
by their own works, the love and kindness of God 
displayed itself in renovating them. The Unitarian 
a'ejoiceth, that by Christ, God v/as manifested in the 
Jlesh; w^hen, anointed with the Holy Ghost and with 
pow^er,he went about doing good, and healing all that 
were oppressed of the devil ; for God was with him, 
and manifested by him, in the miracles, doctrine and 
ministry of Christ, his powder, wisdom and grace. The 
Unitarian rejoicethin Christ Jesus, as having given 

himself 



( Gl > 

himself a ransom ior all, when he died to redeem ^sr 
from this present evil world, to redeem us from ''all 

iniquity, to bring us to God," and by this act of obe- 
dience and philanthropy the foundation was laid for 
the kingdom of grace, under which we are absolved 
from guilt*. 

These are truths welcome to the minds of Unita- 
rians : though they can not discern , m the language 
of the apostle, the doctrines of the trinicy op of 
Calvinism : the doctrines of inherent corruption de- 
rived from Adam, of the Deity or of the atonement 
of Christ. They can not discover ihese principles 
in any other passages in this epistle, where they 
would naturally offer, if they were the doctrines, which 
Timothy and Titus were to preach on the mission 
they were to execute. They find, indeed, the trans- 
gression of Adam referred to 1 Tim, ii. 14. but not 
as that of a feeder al head, not as that of a parent con- 
veying a depraved nature to his posterity ; but mere- 
ly,, on account of a circumstance in the transgr ession 
rather extenuating than aggravating, it is applied by 
the apostle to enforce the subjection of the woman 
'to the man. So far from the Calvinistic doctrine of 
atonement appearing in these epistles, the particular 

p The terms, ransoming and redeeming, are seldom used in scrip- 
ture, but in the metaphorical sense ; without implying the actual, 
real paying a price ; hence Israel were redeemed out of Egypt, and 
Moses was the redee??ier ; 7.v1a-J]yig, ransomer, though he paid no 
price. Peut. vii, 8, Acts, vii, 35. Emlyn's Works^ vol 2, p. 71, 2. J 

expla- 



f 62 ) 

explanation of the infiuence and operation of the 
death of Christ, given Tit. ii, 14. turns solely on its 
moral influence and practical design. So far from, 
the doctrine^ of the trinity or of the godhead of Jesus 
Christ offering itself in these parts of the New Tes- 
tament, the language of the apostle perfectl y corres- 
ponds with the ideas entertained by Unitarians ; but 
militates against the other doctrine. " There is one 
God, and 07ie Mediator between God and Man^ 
the Man Christ Jesus." We ask what would 
any man understand by the expression, ^' There is 
one God,"butthis, that there is but one Being, one 
Mind, one Person, who hath true godhead ? The 
latter clause ^' one Mediator between God and Man, 
*^*the Man Christ Jesus," limits the character of Medi- 
ator to one person. The same manner of expression 
in the former clause, as evidently limits the ascrip^ 
tion of Deity to one person: even to Him^ with, 
whom Christ mediates. 

Instead of finding that the apostle instructs Timo- 
thy and Titus in a system, correspondent to that call- 
ed the trinitarian and Calvinistic ; or in those prin- 
ciples with which modern missionaries have been, 
furnished for the conversion of distant countiies, and 
which you. Sir, deem essential and. necessary to this, 
purpose, we observe a perfect silence concerning 
such principles : — Or else declarations, that stand in 
contradiction to them. 

I am further confirmed, by this means, in the con- 

clusioUj 



( 63 ) 

elusion, that ofFered from an examination of the Acts 
of the Apostles. However your mind may be im- 
pressed, by the review of these apostohcal epistles, 
a firm persuasion is left on mine, that faith and re- 
pentance may be produced, and hchness eifectually 
advanced, independently of that scheme, for which, 
justly following your own convictions, you are a 
zealous advocate. 

I am, Sir, 

Your's, &c.] 



LETTER 



C )■ 



LETTER I¥ 

Revef.end Sir^ 

IT is to he hoped, that since you read the last 
lettev, vou and the reader have not trusted to my 
accuracy/ or lidehtv: hut have taken the New Testa- 
ment into your hands, and examined The Acts of 
*^ the Apo ties" for yourselves. I am very confi- 
dent, that you must have found that silence^ that 
entire silence there, concerning the doctrines of the 
Trinitarian and Calvinistic systems, with a conviction 
of which my mind has been strongly impressed. 

This hath been owned, by those who would gladly 
have derived support to their own sentiments from, 
the sermons of the apostles : and it hath been re- 
solved into the caution and piudence of these holy 
men; fearful of alarming the Jews, who thought 
Christ was a mere man, with the doctrine of his^ 
godhead, before they were well grounded in the be- 
lief, that Jesus was the Christ. Athanasius does not 
pretend to find one place in The Acts," where this- 
doctrine v/as clearly and distinctly taught, though 
he quotes four places, in which the humanity of 
Christ is plainly spoken of. Chrysostom allows, 
that at Athens, Paul called Jesus simply a man and 
nothing further, and for a good reason : for, if they 
often attempted to stone Christ himself; when he 

spake 



( 65 } 

spjlke of his equality with the Father^ ami called him 
on that account a blasphemer^ they would hardly 
have received this doctrine from fishermen, especially 
after speaking of him as crucified* According to 
other fcithers, this caution and reserve were extended 
to the epistles, written to the churches^. 

Not the silence onlrj of the apostles on those 
topics, which you deem so essentially necessary to 
bring men to faith and repentance, hath been ad- 
mitted by orthodox writers : but the efficaci/ and 
Siifficiency ^ by itself, of that Unitarian principle, 
That Jesus was the Christ," on which the aposto- 
lic preachers insist, hath also been granted, and even 
contended for. The pious Bishop Patrick's words 
are remarkable To believe that Jesus is the 
Christ, this alone is the faith which can regene- 
rate man, and put a divine spirit into him ; that is, 
make him a conqueror over the world as Jesus 
" was f." On this simple article v/as the eunuch bap- 
tized. And, even in the third century, the profession 
of faith, proposed to the catechumens previously to 
baptism, did not deviate from these Unitarian prin- 
ciples, on which the first christian church was found- 
ed. The rule of faith," saith Tertullian, is only 
one, admitting of no change or emendation, re- 
''quiring us to believe in one God Ahnighty, tlie 

* Priestley's History of the Early Opinions concerning Christ, vol, 
iii. p 86— 1 22, and Letters to Dr. Horsley. pt. i. p. 37 — 54, and p. 12c.. 

f Locke's Reasonableness of Christianity, p. 291, 

" make]? 



( 66 } 

*^ maker of the world, and in his son Jesus Christ, 
born of the Virgin Mary, crucified under Pontius 
PiiatCj raised from toe dead on the third day, 
received up into l-iczvei% now sitting at the right 
hand of the Father, and who will come again to 
judge both the living and the de^ic^ even by the 
resurrection of the flesh* This law of faith re- 
maining, other things, being matters of discipline 
" and conduGij admat of new correctionSj the grace 
" of God cooperating "^','^ This creed, Sir, contains- 
none of your articles. 

Nay, even to this day, after, as we conceive, the 
pure gospel hath been adulterated with a number and 
variety of the doctrines of men, and impure mixtures 
of error and superstition ; even now doth the church, 
of England admit to the profession of Christianity 
and to her communion, ad^alts, on merely Unitarian^ 
principles ; correspondent to those on which the first 
christian churches, we have seen, were formed. In 
the service for the baptism of those of riper years, the^ 

* " Regula fidei una omnino est, sola immobilis 5c irreformabilis^ 
credeiidi, scilicet, in unicam Deum omnipotentem, mundi con- 
ditorem, et filium ejus Jesum Christum, natum ex Virgine Maria- 
crucifixum sub Pontio Pilato, tertio die resuscitatum a mortuis,. 
" receplum in ccelis, sedentem nunc ad dextram Patris, venturuni. 
**jadicare vivos et mortuos, per carnis etiam resurrectionem.'* 
Tertuliian de ViFginibo Veland. p. 385. in Lord King's Enquiry 
into the Constitution of the Primitive Church, Sec. p. 60. part if. 
1691 : I'he translation above is taken from Dr. Priestley^s Early' 
Qjpinionsj vol. ij p. 313. 

priest 



( fiT ) 

priest 18 directed to ask the convert Wiietlier he be- 
lieve the apostles' creed, which he repeats to him ; 
upon his profession that he doth, and that he desires 
to be baptized into that faith, without one word of 
any other article he baptizes him, and then declares 
him a Christian in these words: We receive 
this person into the congregation of Christ's flock> 
and sign him with the sign of the cross, in token 
that he shall not be ashamed to continue Christ's 
faithful soldier and servant." This is the practice 
of that church, wliich hath incorporated into its 
articles the doctrines of the reformers, to which you 
allude. Her ministers mmt subscribe to the 'J rini- 
tarian and Calvinistic systems ; but she receives to 
her communion those v/ho avow a faith no more 
^ than Unitarian. 

These facts, as to the allov/ed sufiiciency and 
elScacy of principles, really Unitarian, should pro- 
ttct us, wdiom you call Socinians, from censure. 
We have, in this respect, the orthodox church with 
us. But I urge these facts not as authorities only, 
under which \vt may seek protection. I consider 
them as proofs of the power of truth, which is great 
and will prevail ; which, in this instance, forces an 
assent from those, whose general views and aims have 
been to make something more necessary to salvation 
and church-communion, than it appears the apostles 
preached to this end. 

When I consider these things, I am ready to con- 

cludCj 



( 68 ) 

elude, that the glory of our holy religion stands firm, 
without admitting into it tile profession or preaching 
of those topicSj to which you affix so great an impor- 
tance. My conscience will not permit vie to make 
more necessary to the efficacy and success of the gos« 
pel, than what the apostles found to be so. My 
conscience forbids me to make an addition to those 
principles, on which M ey brought men into the king- 
dom of Christ, formed churches, and triumphed over 
the powers of darkness. Nothing has more contri* 
buted to make me an Unitarian, than the books of 
The Acts : than observing what is there related to 
have been preached as the doctrine that would con- 
vert and save men, and what actually had this effect* 
However, Sir, it may be with you and others, I 
have, also, found my devout affections excited and 
elevated, without the aid of those sentiments and that 
language, which the Calvinistjc system supplies. I 
meet with strains of fervent devotion, in the writers 
of that persuasion, running through many p^ges, 
without being blended with their peculiar opinions. 
Frequently in the works of a Flavel, a Baxter, and 
a Howe I have met with large porti0ns^> where these 
sentiments have not occurred ; and it has struck me, 
that the serious, practical spirit seems not to suffer| 
by the omission. The conclusion, I have drawn 
from tliis, has been, that the whole discourse, or the 
whole treatise, might have been without them, and 
yet^, that spirit would not have evaporated; for it 

flowed 



{ 69 ) 

ftowed from general principles, independently of those 
peculiar dogmas. This remark applies, in its fullest 
extent, to the excellent piece of Mr. Howe's, enti- 
tled, The Vanity of this Mortal Life. It applies, 
with the exception of a few sentences, to that rap- 
turous piece of devotion in Baxter's Saints Rest, call- 
ed Heavenly Contemplation, It applies to a justly 
admired tract of another distinguished writer, of the 
last century,thegreat Mr. John Smith, ofCambridge, 
in whose discourse on the Nobleness and Excellence 
of internal, vital Religion, there is not, I think, a sen- 
timent or expression, but what is entirely agreeable 
to the Unitarian system ; and yet of this discourse 
one, whose opinion will have weight with you, saith ; 
for sublimity of thought, strength of expression, 
and ardor of piety, I never saw its equal ; and I 
am confident I never shall see any thing superior 
V* to it, while I live in this world*." This remark 
applies to that pious puritan, Mr. John Rogers' Sixty 
Memorials for a Godly Life ; dictated by the most 
lively sense of religion, but containing no sentiments 
but such as agree with the tJnitarian system. So 
strictly compatible with, so favourable to the cultl- 
vation of a devotional spirit is this system ; I have 
now before me a small volume of pious exercises form- 
ed wholly upon it, and drawn from every chapter in 
the New Testament, entitled A Help in Devotion, 

* Ryland in his edition of Dr, Cotton Mather's Student and Pas- 
tor, page 220. 

being 



( -0 ) 

being the New Testament considered with a view to 
what every chapter in it doth furnish christians with, 
as proper to assist them in their private and family 
devotion ; by Samuel Bolde^ Rector of Steeple cum 
Tyneham, Dorsetshire ; 12mo, 1136. The same 
person %vas author of Animadversions on Dr. Ed- 
wards's Soclnianism Unmasked : and of a Sermon on 
the same subject with Mr. Locke's Reasonableness 
of Christianity. 

[In this connection should be mentioned " Daily De- 
" votions for the Closet," by the late Rev, Samuel 
Merivale. These prayers are characterized by the 
late Rev. Sir James Stonehouse, as "devout" as w^ell 
as " elegant and sensible, far superior to Kenn's and 
" exceeding Patrick and Jenks ; admirable and, per- 

haps, the very best ever written^'." The compo-* 
sitlons, oii which these encomiums are bestowed, are 
formed on Unitarian principles, which the excels 
lent author was known by his friends, to have held. 
They are, therefore, a direct proof, that such senti- 
ments can fan the fiame of piety, and kindle a fer^ 
vor of devotion f.] 

These 

Letters to the Rev. Mr. Stcdman. page 80, 350, 3B7.] 

[fThe preface to these prayers gave the public reason to expect a 
volume of the Author's Essays, and Memoirs of him, which, it is to 
be much regretied, have not appeared ; I. am tempted, therefore^ td 
embrace thiS opportunity of paying a sincere and respectful, though 
feeble and inadequate tribute of regard to his name, which is still 
dear to many, ^^This most worthy, learned and pious man," as 

Mr. 



( 71 ) 



These are, to me proofs, that the Calvinlstic system 
is not essential to devotion. I see the devotional 
spirit diffuse itself through pages, through treatises, 
where there is not a trace of that system. It lives 
and glows without it, and rises to a degree of fervor 
and spirituality equal to any compositions, where 
that system and the phraseology of it have mingled 
and incorporated themselves. Though it is not to 
be doubted, that many pious and worthy persons, 
having been always accustomed to give vent to their 
devotional feelings in language and associations of 
this kind, ure ready to conceive, that, separatedfrom 
them, devotion would languish and die away. This 
is a mistake. This apprehension is the creature of 
habit, not of reason, or reflection, or fact. 

Whatever opinion you. Sir, may entertain or en- 
deavour to give your reader, concerning the piety of 
Socinians, numbers of them have been persons of 

Mr. Orton call.5 hirn (i), was a native of Northampton, "where he 
leceived his academical education under Dr, Doddridge. He was 
first settled, as minister of a Dissenting Congregation, at Sleaford, 
in Lincolnshire, whence he removed to Tavistock, in Devon- 
shire. He, afterwards, resided some years at Exeter ; and w^as The- 
ological Tutor at the Academy in that city : where he died in 1771, 
or 1772, Three articles, in the second and third volumes of the 
Theological Repository came from his able pen. The two first were 
in defence of Dr. Lardner's Letter on the Logos, The third discuss- 
ed this question, " whether it can be supposable, that an honest and 
impartial inquirer should resist the evidences of Christianity ?3 

[(ij Orton'* Letters to a Young Clergyman,*' page 63, €4.] 

eminent 



( "72 ) 



cminen-i piety. To mention the living might be in- 
vidious and awkward. But I appeal to the memoirs 
of the dead ; of Faustus Socinus himself, of the Po- 
lish Brethren, of Biddle, of Emlyn, of Hopkins, of 
Lardner, of Jebb, and of Price. If the number of 
excellent characters should not be so great, as among 
other denominations ; you are sensible that a cause of 
this is easily to be assigned ; the number of Socini- 
ans hath always, in the later ages of the church, born 
a small proportion to the nuinber of trinitarians and 
Calvinists ; and the number of sincere, conscientious 
persons attentive to the cultivation of pious affecti- 
ons, hath born a small proportion to those, who have 
been nominal Socinians or CalviniGts. I need not 
remind you, that the operation and force of the hu- 
man mind are limited, and if there have been, or be 
now, a defect in devotion among Socinians, compar- 
ed with Calvinists, it is to be accounted for in a 
manner not at all disparaging ro the principles of the 
former, with respect to their influence on the pious 
feelings. They, deeply engaged in the investigation 
of truth, absorbed in gaining just ideas, may have 
been necessarily betrayed into a neglect of the culture 
of the heart and afrections Had they attended 

equally 

£* i« Dr. Priestley and Mr. Belsham have taught us, that indijjer" 
ence to religion, is friendly to the acquisition of truth : and Dr. Toul- 
" min completes the scheme, by teaching us that ike acquisition cf 
truths is friendly to indifference to religion ; or, which is the same 
thing, that it leads to the neglect of cultivating holy affections V So- 

*' cinianism 



( 73 ) 



equally to this as to that, they would have felt an 
energy in the principles, which they held in common 
with their fellow christians, to raise, and feed, and 
maintain the devotional fervor of the mind. 

["It can not, and need not be denied," to adopt 
the remarks, in an excellent discourse,* that those 
studies and speculations, in which the reasoning 
power is chiefly exercised, do tend, in many cases, 
to take something from the ardor of feeling, and 
by consenuence reduce to a lower tone, those emo- 
tions cfhope and joy, of which persons of warmer 
imagination and stronger passions are more sus- 

cinianism Indefensible*" p. ig. Mr. Fuller is mistaken : This is 
not my assertion, nor my language. I speak not of the acquisition^ 
but of the investigation of truth. This calls not so much the affec- 
tions a:i the understanding into exercise. And while truth, even 
religious truth, is an object pursuit only, it may not operate : 
though it may do so, after it is acquired. What is there more ia 
saying this, than that before a principle of knowledge becomes 
subject of rational belief, of persuasion and conviclisnj it may not 
produce its full, if any, effect ? Mr. Fuller adds, The knowledge 
" of Christ's doctrine was formerly promoted by doing his zuill : and 
*' being knov/n, it invariably wrought in a way of righteousness," 
This is too hasty and unguarded an assertion. How did the know- 
ledge of Christ's doctrine invariably produce righteousness, when 
the apostles found it needful severely to reprehend many of the first 
christians ? when many were the enemies of the cross of Christ ? 
Phil. iii. 18. when the apostle Paul speaks of holding the truth in 
unrighteousness ? and, in modern times, doth Calvinism invariably 
work in a way of righteousness, among those who embrace it PJ 

Mr» Lindsey's Sermon on the Death of the Rev. Jcs:ph 
Towers, LL, D. page 17. 

E cepiible?' 




( '7^^ ) 

^* ceptible. But surely neither the strength nor value 
^^>of faith ought to be estimated merely by consti- 
tutlonal or accidental sensibih'ty. The calm devo- 
tiouy the com.posed tranquillity, the rational, but 
steady hope of a sober and collected mind, are per- 
" haps more dignified, certainly not less beautiful 
and pleasing, than the raptures of a more animated 
and exulting faith. Each is good in its kind, when 
connected with just views, and founded upon just 
grounds ; and nothing but ignorance or bigotry 
will undervalue either."] 

The perfections and providence of God, the awful 
realities of a future state, the resurrection, the hope 
of eternal hfe, the grace of God in Christ Jesus, in- 
dependently of Calvinistic phraseology or systemati- 
cal explanations, are the fuel by which the fire of 
devotion is kindled and supplied. The apostle, speak- 
ing of Jesus Christ, salth : ^*WhoisofGod made 

to us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, 
*^ and redemption." To this account of things every 
christian, of every denomination, the Unitarian chris- 
tian not less than others, givetha most ready and cor- 
dial assent. Here he findeth food for pious 
gratitude, for humble hope, for elevated faith, while 
hebelievethj that GoD, even the Father, is the 
author of the gospel dispensation ; that it was com- 
municated by Jesus Christ, as the minister of recon- 
ciliation, and the author of salvation ; and that he 
conveyeth to us, through hinij knowledge, pardon, 

holiness. 



( 75 ) 

holiness, and eternal life. While the christian, even 
the Unitarian, feels these to be blessings of unspeak- 
able importance, blessings which render the gospel a 
pearl of invaluable price, his high, grateful and de- 
vout admiration of the value and excellence of the 
gospel, and of the grace and goodness displayed in it, 
is drawn forth, and shows itself in a religious temper 
and acts of piety. 

I am, Sir, 

Your's respectfully. 



E 2 LETTER 



( 76 ) 



LETTER V. 

Reverend Sir, 

IN your second letter^', you call upon your 
christian brethren to examine matters to the bot- 
torn, and judge for themselves, whether they 
might not as well expect grapes of thorns, or figs 
" of thistles, as repentance towards God, or faith 
towards our Lord Jesus Christ, proceeding from 
Socinian principles." I cordially go along with 
you in recommending a thorough examination, and 
I have, in my turn, endeavoured to assist our readers 
in this inquiry. The conclusion, in my opinion, 
comes out quite the reverse of what you represent 
it. My appeal hath been to fads : and those facts, 
in a series and succession of them, exhibit thousands 
of cases, where repentance towards God, and faith 
in Jesus Christ, arose from the principles, and those 
principles only, to which the modern Unitarian 
subscribes. This leaves on my mind a deep 
impression of the great impropriety of your publica- 
tion, both of its general design, and of the insinu- 
ation and reflections with which it abounds. In 
vindication of those principles which you attack and 
depreciate, in vindication of their moral tendency 

* Page 2i» 

and 



( ) 

and powerful efficacy, I call upon the churches of 
Christ formed in Judea and Samaria^ I call upon the 
converts at Corinth and Athens, and I say unto them, 
Ye are our epistle, known and read of all men i 
ye are manifestly declared to be th e epistle of 
Christ, written not with ink, but with the spirit 
of the living God ; not in tables of stone, but m 
the fleshy tables of the heai't." 
Whatever may be the state of piety among modem 
Unitarians, whether their congregations abound in 
conversions of the profane to a life of holiness or 
not, it is plain, that the defect doth not arise from 
the nature of their leading and discriminating prin- 
ciples ; because the first christian churches were 
formed upon those principles. But the preaching of 
them was not, in the first instance, always successful. 
You are not to be inform-cd, Sir, that at Antiocli the 
Jews spake against those things which were spoken 
" by Paul:" that at Thessalonica, many *'Jev/s 
" believed not that at Athens, some," whom 
the apostle addressed, '^believed not;" and others 
postponed the consideration of the subject to another 
time. Yet, you would not construe this unsuccess- 
fulness to the discredit of the doctiine preached. 
We may complain, then, that the conclusion you 
draw against our system, from the ineificacy of our 
doctrine, is neither candidly nor justly drawn. 

I will venture to assert, that, in some degree, our 
unsuccessfulness is to be imputed to the conduct of 

E 3 those 



( 78 ) 

those, who, instead of refuting our doctrine by plain 
scripture and sound argument, give representations 
of it that are invidious, raise prejudices against it, 
and prevent its having a fair hearing. The treatment 
we meet with, is a just ground for complaint and 
remonstrance. Our congregations" are spoken of 
as gradually dwindling away, and generally falling 

into decay*." Our principles are described as 
having nothing in them, comparatively speaking, 

to alarm the conscience, or inteiest the heart f ." 
Our sincerity, zea.1, and devotion are placed on a 
footing with that of Saul, the persecutor and enemy 
of Christ ; and it is more than intimated, that a 
species of devotion may obtain to a high degree, 
consistently enough with the worst principles ; and 
that the gospel had no worse enemies, than the 
devout and honourable among the Jews J. After we 
are held up in these lights, from the pulpit and the 
press, it is then urged against us, by way of argument 
and reproach, that our preaching is without effect. 
The most that, under such circumstances, so unfa- 
vourable to its reception, can be expected is, that a 
few viiW hear it, and that a few will be built up in 
faith and holiness and the love of God§. 

Your 

* Page 54. f Page 54. % Page 10. 

[§ Bfcause Mr. Fuller's v/ords are quoted in the above paragraph, 
he remarks : It is rather singular, that those facts which I alleged 
to have existed at the timz I wcte.^ should be attributed in any 



( 79 ) 

Your representations of our principles, besides 
being thus invidious, are not properly dircc ed, nor 

to 

** degree to Me." Socinianism Indefensible," p. 22. — -Had 
this been the case, it would have been not only singular, but absurd. 
The language of Mr. Fuller was adopted, because it had a tendency 
to produce, in future, the effect, to which I refer ; by leaving on the 
minds of others the most unfavourable iaipressions with regard to 
Unitarians : and because similar language has often been held con- 
cerning them, both from the press and the pulpit. Mr. Puller him- 
self, though he is not to be charged with producing facts, which 
•* existed before he wrote," would have felt little inducement, little 
stimulus to have drawn up and committed to the press, his repre- 
sentations of the Socinian system, and of those who embrace it, had 
he not designed to have influenced the opinion of his readers ; had 
he not promised himself, that a regard would be paid to what he 
wrote; so as to raise a strong disapprobation, if not an abhorrence, 
of the sentiments, against which he took up his pen. It is an ancient, 
and hath, in many, m.any instances, been, through all ages, an effec- 
tual way of opposing any principles, and those who embraced tliem, 
to create an odium against theTn. Mr. Fuller complains, that 
" Preachers, Writers, and Reviewers, of every description, have 
*' thought themselves at liberty to inveigh against the * gloomy, li- 
centious and blasphemous doctrines of Calvin:' and yet," he says, 
'■^ we have experienced very little, if any injury from these represen- 
tations." P. 22, 23, It is easy to assign reasons for this, nd for 
the different effect in the former and latter case. It is well known, 
that they who are attached to Calvinistic sentiments are scarcely ever 
induced to attend the preachers, from whom any such invidious 
representations of Calvinism might be apprehended : nor are they 
disposed to read the treatises which are directed against their opini- 
ons : and indeed are dissuaded and deterred from the perusal of 
them ; as pieces which would shake their faith, unhinge their minds, 
and draw them into dangerous errors.— Even when such representa- 
tions obtain a hearingf^ they have a great k.flucnce to overcome : an 
E d infiueace^ 



( 80 } 



to the point. Instead of applying your arguments 
to the general, the fundamental prmciples of our 
system.c that there is one God the Father, and 
one mediator between God and man, the Man 
Christ Jesus : you only bring forward particular 
positions, scattered through the works or discourses 
of several eminent persons, known and able advocates 
of the Unitarian faith, which have no inim.ediate and 
direct connexion with the first principles of it. 
These positions may, or may not be true, and the 
truth of the great doctrines of the unity of God, and 
the humanity of Christ, remain, in either case, unaf- 
fected by it*. Yet these positions, the speculations 

of 

influence, vv^hich disinterestedness, the prevailing love of truth, and 
repeated attention and reflection only can overcome ; the influence 
of long received, established and popular principles ; the influence 
of authority and power ; the influence of education and early at- 
tachment. Any system may well support itself against obloquy, 
aided by such a combination of influences in its favour ; and against 
accusations, that either are not heard, or, if heard, are rejected with- 
out inquiry into; the truth of them. Invidious representations of 
IJnitarianism have the popular mind on their side ; and are echoed 
back by the popular voice. As soon as they are displayed, the effect 
is produced. 3 

On this passage Mr. Fuller remarks ; The unity of God 
and the humanity of Christ, then, it seems, are the principles 

c' which I ought to have attacked : that is to say, I ought to have 
attacked principles which I profess to believe, and not those v. hich 

*' I profess to disbelieve." " Socinianism Indefensible," p. 14. 

Certainly Mr. Fuller would be expected, when writing against the 



( 81 ) 

of intelligent individuals, are collected togelher, und 
exhibited as the essential principles of the creed of 
Unitarians, as the credeiida of the whole party. 
This mode of attack appears to me to be neither fair, 
nor conclusive. 

Your using, Sir, the term, Socinians, has also a 
natural tendency to aftect our reputation and useful- 
ness. It is a term of reproach, and we object to it 
on every groimd. It doth not truly express our 
principles ; for the opinions of modern Unitarians 
differ materially from those of Socinians^ and they 

opinions of any body of men, to have animadverted on tHeir specific^ 
•discriminating sentiments : and. not to have brought forward, as their 
^pinions, assertions, which have no peculiar, necessary connection 
with them : which do not enter into their common creed : which 
2nay be admitted, or discarded, and the leading opinions of the 
party remain the same. But Mr. Fuller, it seems, agrees with the 
Socinians, admitting v/ith them the unity of God and the humanity o£ 
Christ. But does he receive these principles, in the pure, simple form 
in which Unitarians embrace them ? Hath he not incorporated other 
principles with them, which, in the view of Unitarians, are incom« 
patible with them ? Doth he not contend for those incorporations as 
essential and fundamental doctrines of Christianity? Notwithstand- 
ing the avowal of his belief in the divine unity, in the passage above, 
he owns, p. 24, that he does not consider that unity as personal, and 
consequently does not hold the same tenet with the Unitarians. Ifr 
Avas then mere evasion, or trifling, to plead that he could not attack 
their leading sentiment without impeaching his own principles. He 
appears, in another instance also to involve himself in contradictions, 
%vhile he disclaims " a division in the divin-e nature," and yet 
pleads for 2l personal distinction in it." P. 24. What can mark a 
more clear, definite division, than distinct personalities v.'ith their 
peculiar attributes^ I «an not understand.] 

E 5 choose 



f 82 ) 

choose not to be denominated by a name^ which may 
imply that they receive tenets they do not hold. It 
doth not convey a true idea^ or an idea that we can 
by any means allow, concerning the origin of our 
religious sentiments ; for, while it intimates that the 
doctrines of the unity of person in the godhead and 
the humanity of Jesus can not be traced to any 
higher antiquity than the times of Socinus, it is 
known that xve consider these doctrines as the pinmi- 
tive truth ; anjd the passages, which I have brought 
forward, prove, that they were the leading principles 
of the apostolical sermons. It doth not give a just 
view of the groimds of their faith ; for, so far are 
they from taking their opinions from Socinus, t^e 
majority of them, it may be presumed, are not ac- 
quainted with a page of his works ; nor do any of 
them acknowledge liis authoriti/ m matters of faith. 
One is our master^ even Christ. And it is not a 
candid description of them. For, though Socinus 
was a truly excellent man, distinguished by many 
eminent virtues ; one who studied the scriptures dili- 
gently, sacrificed much and endured much in the 
cause of religion ; yet, through ignorance of his 
character and through prejudice, an odium is con- 
nected with his name ; and the application of it to 
any persons now carries that odium and obloquy 
along with it. You assure us, indeed, that ^ou do 
not use it for the mean purpose of reproach'-^ 
but I am apt to think, such is the power of habit and 

Preface, page 7, 

asso- 



( S3 ) 

association, ihls deciaration will be insufEcient to 
wipe off the reproach, that hath long and uniformly 
been connected with it. 

The name by which we choose to be called is, 
vou are sensible, that of Unitarians. We approve 
of this, because, while it precisely describes our dis- 
tinguishing tenet, it doth not imply the admitting of 
any hunran authority in matters of religion. But 
you will not allow the exclusive use of this name. 
The term, as constantly expressed by ourselves, you 
say, " signifies those professors of Christianity, who 
" worship but one God ; but this is not that, %vhere~ 
in they can be allowed to be distinguished from 
others ; for what professors of Christianity are 
there who profess to worship a plurality of Gods ? 
Trinitarians profess also to be Unitarians ) they, 
as well as their opponents, believe there is but 
" one God-." 

This appears to me a strange, and contfadictorv 
assertion. It is to say, that they who admit a three- 
fold division or distinction in the divine nature, hold 
the same tenet with those who contend for its simple 
unity ; that they who ascribe to each division sepa- 
rately all divine perfections and prerogatives, embrace 
the same doctrine with those who appropriate them 
to one only ; or that plurality and unity of person is 
the same. The trinitarian doctrine, according to 
the articles of the church of England, is, that in 

* Preface, page 7^ 

E 6 ^< the 



f S4 } 

the unity of the godhead there be th ree persons 
^' of one substance, power and eternity ; the Father, 
^' the Son and the Holy Ghost." According to the 
catechism of the reverend assembly of divines, 
there are three persons in the godhead, the Father, 
the Son and the Holy Ghost ; and these three are 
one ; the same in substance, equal in power and 
*^ glory." In opposition to this doctrine of ^' three 
^' persons making one God," the Unitarians main- 
tain that the essence of the Deity is simple and 
undivided ; that God the Father only (and not the 
*^ Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit) is the true 
and living God, and the fountain of all power and 
^* perfection in the universe ; and that to elevate any 
other beings to an equality with him is idolatry 
and impiety*." The difference between these 
two creeds is, in my opinion, most material ; so 
great and marked, as to entitle the latter, if we would 
use terms with truth and propriety, to the exclusive 
title of Unitarian. In that creed only is, really, 
unequivocally and explicitly maintained the doctrine 
of the divine unity ; a strict and undivided unity. 
But Trinitarianlsm is a multiplication of Deity ; It 
implies and asserts an union of two other persons, 
Jesus and the Holy Spirit, with the supreme Father, 
and it calls them^ these three persons^ one God. 
Though it seems to allow, that there is but one 
God ; yet, it holds a language inconsistent with these 

* Dr. Price's Sermoas on the Christian PoctrinC; p, 73. 

sen* 



( 85 ) 



sentiments, and is a foundation for the worship of 
three. Pardon me then, Sir, if I assert, at least if I 
give it as my opinion, that they who hold and pre- 
serve the doctrine of the unity of God, whole and 
uncorrupt, in all its simplicity, have even an exclu- 
sive tide to the name of Unitarians. The ground 
of their faith, and the ground on which they claim 
tliis name, is this ; that the scriptures lead them " to 
^' consider God as one person, as w^e, each of us, 

consider ourselves as one person ; and they give 
^' us not the least ground to suppose God to consist 

of two, or three, or more persons. This simple 
" idea of God, that he is one single person, literally 

pervades every passage of the sacred volumes^." 

The 

* Lindscy's Examination of Robinson's Plea, p. 174. ^' How 
can we form any notion of the unity of the supreme Being, but 
*' from that unity of which we ourselves are conscious ?" Memoirs 
of the Life and Writings of Mr. Gray, p. 266. 

[•' It might have answered a better purpose, if, instead of this 
*• general assertion, either of these gentlemen (?. e, Mr. Lindsey and 
Dr. Toulmin) would have pointed us to one single instance^ in 
which the unity of God is literally declared to be j6tfrj^?«a/." 

Socinianism Indefensible," p. 25. The appeal, one would 

think, might be made to Mr. Fuller's own good sense. What can be 
more decisive instances of this, than the many passages in which the 
singular personal pronouns and their correlates are used concerning 
the supreme Being ? /, me^ my^ and mine^ when God speaks of 
himself: thou^ thee^ thy^ and thine, when he is addressed : he^ him^ 
himself^ and his^ when he is spoken of. Besides the multitudes of 
texts, in which these singular personal pronouns are applied, so 
clearly expressing a personal unity, there are other texts that im- 
pliedly 



( S6 ) 



The title of one of your letters is, I observe. On 
the reseiTiblance of Sccinianism to Deism, and the 

<i ten- 

pliedly or expressly deny God to be more than one person; &. g. 
Thou shalt have no other God but or besides me " There is 
^' no other God besides me " I, even I am he, and there is 
** no God with me " I am God, and there is none else " I am 
God and there is none like me.'' Exod. xx. 3. Isai. xlv. 5, 22. 
xiiii. iij 25. " Can human understanding possibly form any other 
^' notion from these words, than that God, who best knows himself, 
** expressly declares himself to be one person : and that no other 
*■* person besides his person is God(i) ?" The word, God, occurs 
twelve hundred and eighty times in the New Testament only : yet 
there is not one of these texts, wherein it necessarily signifies more 
than one person : there is not one where we are obliged to under- 
stand it of three persons. Nay, tl^ere are several hundreds, where 
it is expressly limited to the Father only. '* If God is more than. 
*' one person, the sacred scriptures are one continued grammatical 
impropriety^ almost from the Deginning to the end ; wHich would ■ 
^' be strange and ridiculous, if not impious, to suppose. Besides, 
' «' it is an absurdity in itself, and a gross perversion of language to 
affirm, that one God can ever mean more than one person. A 
man might as well as say, that one man meant several men, cut 
*■* angd several angels, as assert that one God- includes several divine 
persons. For what is a divine person, but (as has been frequently 
observed by Trinitarians) a periphrasis or circumlocution, or in 
plain English a round-about way of speaking, to denote one 
*« Gcd(2)." These points have been repeatedly illustrated and 
proved, at full length, by Unitarian writers. It has been done rn 
those very treatises, from which Mr. Fuller has, to create an odium 

[(i) Haines' Scripture Account of the Attributes and Worship 
^« of God," part i. ch. vij 

[(2) Christie's Discpurscs on the Uivine Unity/* 2nd edit. g« 

12j 13.] 



( s -r ) 

tendency of one to the other."' This also appears 
to me a solecism : it implies inconsistency and absur- 
dity. It implies, that to recehe the divine missic^i 
of Jesus has a resemblance to considering him as a 
deceiver : that to take him as mv master, the resur- 
rection and the life^ has a tendency to the rejection of 
him : that to learn of him is to deny him : that to 
profess to obey liim resembles disobedience : and 
that to hope for the mercy of Gad in him will lead 
mc to cast oiFthis hope. 

It is a singular circnmstanGCy that a resemblance and 
affinity to Deism should be ascribed to the creed of 
those, among v;hom have arisen the mx-st able critics 
in the scriptures, and the most eminent advocates for 
divine revelation, Socinus himself wrote a piece 
entitled, An Argument for the authority of the 

Iloly Scriptures which a bishop of the church 
of England recommended to his clergy, as a valuable 

against Soclnians, culled the passages for his animadversions. See 
Mr. Lindsey's Apology, ch. iii. and Dr. Priestley's Letters to the 
Inhabitants of Birmingham, Lett. xvii. Yet, as if the matter had 
not been even attempted, Mr. Fuller calls on Mr. Lindsey,^ as well 
as myself (i), to point out out single passage, in which -the unity of 
God is literally declared to be personal. His readers, I am con- 
vinced, if they wish impartially to seek the truth, would do well 
to read carefully, for themselves, the writers whose discussions ou 
this subject he has overlooked, j 

[({) See my Discourse preached at Tiverton, July 5, 1797, enti- 
tled '* Th« Injustice of classing Unitarians with Deists and Infi- 
delsj*' p. 24.] 

perfor- 



( ,88 ) 

performance* : and whieh a divine of that church 
translated into English f. Lardner spent his hfe, and^ 
fortune, in part, in investigating and proving ''The 
Credibility of the GospeL'' Lowman, Forster, 
and Duchal, were Unitarians ; so were Locke, and 
Sir Isaac Newton. These two not only defended 
revelation, but studied and explained the scriptures. 
The Polish brethren are among the commentators of 
the first reputation. Among authors of the present 
day, no one hath written so much on the evidences 
of Christianity, as hath Dr. Priestley. I will add, 
from what I know of those w^hom you style Socini- 
ans, and with whom you do not pretend to have any 
extensive acquaintance t ; '' that amidst a]l the vi- 
*' cissitudes of life, the great principles of the gospel 
are the ground of their consolation and hope. 
There are no m.en to whom the glad tidings of eter- 
nal life are more desirable, or who look forward 
with more stedfastness and joy to that period, when. 
*' this mortality shall be exchanged for immortality 

You, Sir, attempt to prove the relation of Socini- 
anisrn to Deism, from an agreement in some instan- 

^ Bishop SmalIbrooke*s Charge to ihz Clergy of the Diocese of St^ 
David's, 1728, p. 34. 

f Mr. Edward Coombe, 
% Page 319. 

§ Remarks on the Bishop of Lincoln'i Charge, p, 1©. 

ces. 



( ^0 ) 

CCS, \So the primitive christians were charged by 
their idolatrous neighbours with Atheism, because 
with Atheists they worshipped not their Gods*. There 
must, in general, be some principles in common be- 
tween persons whose sentiments, in many essential 
points, are remote from each other. Under a variety 
of opinions, and a great difference of judgment on 
some points, there will be a resemblance in other 
points between creatures^ endowed with the same 
powers and passions. For instance, if, as you say, 

Socinians are continually boasting of their success, 
" and of the great increase of their numbers ; and so 

are also the Deists f I am apt to think, that this 
point of resemblance may be carried farther, even to 
Mr. Fuller ; for the inanner, in which he speaks of 
^' hundreds of ministers," and "hundreds of con- 
" gregations, J" that furnish proofs of the efficacy 
of the Calvinistic system, may be thought to bear a 
great agreement with the strains of triumph, which 
he asoribes to Deists and Socinians. But I cannot 
think, that there is in his sentiments, or in his mind, 
any particular tendency which will lead him to the 
camp of either. 

I1ie general tenor of your book and your mode 
of arguing remind me. Sir, of a piece published m 

*' Bullet's History of the Estabiishmeat of Chnstianit):'. 

t Psge 3i4> , 
;t Page 27, 

the 



C 90 ) 

the last century, entitled : Pu-ritanisme the mo^- 
^' thet ; SiNN£ the daughte: : or^.a treatise wherein 
is demonstrated from twenty^ several doctrines 
and positions of puritanisme ; that the faith and 
religion of tht puritans^ doth forcibly induce its 
professors to the perpetrating of Sinn and doth 
^« warrant the committing of the same.'^ I could 
wish the piece in your hands, and to see what re- 
marks you would oiFer on the candor of the impu- 
tation, or the conclusiveness of the argument. The 
same remarks, I am inclined to think, would supply 
an answer to the general tenor of your own treatise. 

But you ^'have been told, that it is very common 
" for those who go over to Infidelity, to pass through 
Socinianism in their way. If this be the case,'^ 
you add, ^' it is no more than may be expected 
according to the natural course of things A 
similar rem^ark, if I mistake not, I have seen made on 
the side of Popery agamst the reform.aiion, that Pro- 
testantism was the pass to Infidelity f. Fact may be 

* Page 31^ 

[f But what does this prove ?" asks Mr. Fuller. The quss- 
tion is, Is such a charge capable of being supported ? A few soli- 
*' tary individuals might doubtless be produced." Number is in 
this case, of no consequence, to the conclusiveness of the argument* 
The question fs simply this ; will Mr Fuller, will any one, because 
some have passed from Popery through Protestantism to Infidelity, 
admit this to be a just medium to prove Protestantism an erroneous 
system? Neither can Unitarianism be proved to be an erroneous 
scheme, or to have a natural and direct tendency to Deism, by 
similar facts.J 

admitted^, 



( 91 ) 

admitted in several instances to verify it, in both 
cases ; and the same general ansv,^er offers to each. 
With respect to those who nave been educated in 
Popery, or in Calvinism, the doctrines of religion have 
come to them before the proofs of the truth of Chris- 
tianity ; and with a mixture of exphcations and in- 
ferences peculiar to each scheme, The effect 
which too frequently follows, from Christianity 
being psesented in this form, is,'^ as an excellent 
writer observes, that, when any articles, which 
appear as parts of it, contradict the apprehension 
of the persons to whom it is proposed, men of rash 
^' and confident tempers hastily and indiscriminately 
reject the w^-iole*.'' Or if they do make a stop, 
and pause at some intermediate stage, having never 
felt a foundation, by studying the credibihty of the 
gospel • and having probably rejected, w^ith precipi- 
tance and haste, the principles of education, they are 
more easily led aw^ay by new difficulties and objec- 
tions, affecting not particular doctrines but the truth 
of revelation. The blame or reflection doth not lie 
on the sentiments, w^hich they may, for an intenne-- 
diate space, hold; but on their not having preserved, 
nor been taught to preserve the separation between 
evidences and doctrines ; nor having been accustom- 
ed to investigate and ascertain the former distinct-- 
ly and independently of the latter. 

^' Piley's Eyidsaces of Christianity. K ii. p. .39 8vo. edition.- 



( 92 ■) 

You have one Letter^ No. XL in which you pro« 
fess to compare the Systems in their influence to 
<^ promote the love of Christ as I have not, with 
respect to the other divisions of your w^ork, entered 
into a minute and particular discussion of your rea- 
soning, or examination of your quotations, neither 
shall I do it here. But I would lay before you and 
our readers, what I have already oflfered on the nature 
and grounds of the love of Christ, in a paper, publish- 
ed several years since> in I'he Theological Reposi- 
" tory* and which, I conceive, will form a suitable 
appendix to these letters. 

But before I drop my pen, I request your attention 
to one passage, and the only one in your work, where 
my name occurs. You bring a charge of pride against 
the Socinians; and among other proofs of it is what 
you call their spouting extravagant compliments 

on one another." At the bottom of the page you 
say, See Mr. Toulmin's Sermon, for Mr. 
Robinson." Whether the eulogium I passed on Mr. 
Robinson were extravagant or not, the reader, who 
is conversant with his works, and has perused the 
memoirs of him lately published, will determine f. 
' ' , ■ But 

* Vol \n. p. 284. 

[f I stand, here, corrected, Mr. Fuller's «t5ri».ure, I perceive, did 
not, as he observes, refer to an encomium bestowed on Mr. Robin- 
son, but to an eulogium on Mr. Dyer, who has since appeared as 
his, biographer. But the sentimeats expressed above concerning 

Mir. 



( 93 ) 



But I totally disavow the motive^ to which you insi- 
nuate my compliments to his memory is to be impu* 
ted ; viz. a pride in overrating and extolling his abili-= 
ties and character, because they reflected honour on 
the sentiments, which, before his death, it was suppos- 
ed he had embraced^ My respect for Mr. Robinson, 
I must inform you, commenced with the first know- 
ledge I had of his character. This was years before 

^Ir, Robinson have, now, ptovoked Mr. Fuller's animadversions. 
On this occasion he adds : "I may remark, however, from Dr. 

Toulmin's account of his regard for Mr, Robinson, that he pays 
^* but little respect to the apostolic manner of regarding persons, 

viz, *Jor the truth'' s sake that dwelleth in them.* Truth had no 
*■* share in Dr. Toulmin's regard ; but th^ love of liberty was substi- . 

tuted in its place as a companion for piety." Socinianism Inde- 
fens, p. 34. On the ^"candor and liberality of this remark I shall 
liot pronounce : but I would observe, that the logical justness of it 
may be denied. Hath piety, hath a zeal for liberty against all hu- 
'man inventions and impositions in religion, hath the sacrifice of in* 
terest for the sake of conscience no connection with truth ? Is not 
the approbation bestowed upon these traits of character expressive 
of a regard for truth ? Or is an attachment founded on an agree- 
ment in doctrinal sentiments the only, and decisive, expression of 
it ? May we not even for the truth's sake feel respect and afFection 
for those, who according to our own views hold speculative errors, 
when they shew dispositions of mind, that are favourable to the 
^discovery and profession of truth, and act from integrity and con- 
science ? When Nathaniel was in a great mistake, and betrayed even 
considerable prejudices against the claims of Christ, Jesus looked on 
him with high regard, and bestowed on him a fine and generous 
encomium, celebrating him as a pattern of truth and sincerity of 
heart. There may be truth in the heart, when there are errors in 
the head, and for this truth's sake a man may be justly entitled to 
our w-arni regards.] 



jbfs deaths and before the change of his sentiments. 
The correspondence I had with him began about the 
year 1775. It originated with myself, and commen- 
ced with some mark of the respect due to his charac- 
ter, and of the friendship for which his circumstances 
then called, wliich it was happily in my power, at 
that timCp to render to him ; when he was, by prin- 
ciple and intimacy, connected with the particular 
baptists. My regard for Mr. Robinson did not ebb 
and flow with the fluctuation of his opinions : but 
w^as governed by the permanent qualities of the m.an, 
the friend of liberty and piety, who had sacrificed 
m_uch for conscience. I may speak the more 
boldly on this head, because I have given other proofs 
of my readiness to own and praise worth, wherever 
found, in the various additions I have made, as often 
as great and excellent characters of any party or 
creed came before me, in my new edition of Mr. 
Neal's History of the Puritans." 

Your imputation, therefore, has not done me jus- 
tice. But you did not know me, except as a Socinian, 
and a Socinian biographer : this character you might 
think incompatible with that of the fair and candid 
historian. When you are convinced, that I have also 
appeared in that character, you will, I would per- 
suade myself, should an opportunity offer, be ready 
to own it, and to retract your reflections. But I 
dwell too much on this trifling circumstance, which 
does not materially affect your argument or my own. 

I leave 



( ) 

I leave your work, my remarks, and the questions 
between us, to the candid and intelHgent reader. 

To him I recommend the following excellent sen- 
timents from Dr. Lardner : Truth in things of reli- 
gion is not a matter of indifference. Every virtu- 
ous mind must be desirous to know it. But no 
-speculative belief, without practice, is saving, or 
will give a man real worth and excellence. The 
^* knowledge that puffeth up is vain and insignificant. 
To knowledge there should be added humility, 
gratitude to God who has afforded- us means and 
opportunities of knowledge ; a modest sense of 
^' our remaining ignorance and imperfection ; a diffi- 
*' dence and apprehensiveness, that though vv/e see 
some things with great evidence, and nre firmly 
persuaded of their truth, nevertheless many of our 
" judgments of things may be false and erroneous. 
We should likewise be cautious of judging 
others. Some who have less knowledge, may 
have more virtue. God alone knows the hearts 
of men, and all their circumstances ; and is there- 
fore the only judge what errors are criminal, and 
how far men fall short of improving the advantages 
afforded them, or act up to the light that has been 
*^ given them With 

* Lardner's MTorks, 8vo b. x, page 633. or, Two Schemes of a 
Trinity considered, Sec. in Four Sermons, p. 71. 

£Mr. Fuller expresseth his approbation of some of the above sen- 
timcnts from Dr, Laidner, and grants that we should be cautious in 

judging 



( 96 ) 



With every good wish that success may attend all 
your just and scriptural attempts to promote practi- 
cal reli^oion^ 

I am^ 

Reverend Sir, respectfully, 

Your humble Servant. 

judging of others. But, as if unv^illing to relinquish the right he 
has assumed of judgiug Socinians, he contends, that, *'if it be pre* 
sumptuous to judg^ of others by their words and actions, I have writ- 
*'ten presumptuously in affirming, that the number of sincere, con-, 
scientious persons, attentive to the cultivation of pious affections, 
hath borijC a small proportion to those ho have been nominal So- 
** cinians and Calvinists : and tliat it is presumption in me to complain, 
" as I have p. 39, of the want candour and justice in him." Socini* 
anism Indefen, p. 35, 6. — On this point it might be sufRcient to 
leave the impartial reader to decide between us. If I am justly 
chargeable with presumption, or through inadvertence have fallen 
into it, I could wish the sentences that prove it cancelled. But I 
would observe, that I am not, at present, CGnvinced, that this is the 
fact, As to the latter case, in which Mr. Fuller is disposed to im- 
pute it to me, if he examine tlie passage more accurately he will per- / 
ceive, that my charge against him i? founded on his not nriaintaining, 
in similar cases, the same rule of judging : on his discrediting the 
Unitarian doctrine on account of us incihcacy, when he would notv, 
1 am confident, on the ground of unsucce: sfulnes?, have cast the like 
imputatiors on the Erst preachers of christianity.~^In the former 
instance, the :;rgument points to a general, ostensible fact, not to 
speculative a:^sertions. — In neither case doth the censure go further 
than to overt-acts. Overt- acts, and not the heart, are open to hu- . 
man inspection, and in judging of them., we may err through igno- 
rance of some circumstances, or be rash through prejudice. The 
heart is amenable at a higher tribunal. On overt-acts were grounded . 
the censures of Peter and Paul against Sim.on and Elymas : which 
examples; Mr. Fuller appears to consider, as justifying the' strain of 
hiz own writings. The former of these men tendered money to pur- 
chase 



( ) 



chase the gifts of the holy spirit; the other openly withstood the 
' apostle, and sought to turn away the deputy from the faith. But these 
Cases, though the judgment passed in each had not referred to the 
ri;«df?/(:; of the offenders, would not justify Mr. Fuller, or myself, or 
any one else, in judging the hearts of others, unless we possessed with 
the apostles the like authority and the like gift of discerning spirits, 

Mr. Fuller, indeed, allows, that we should never attempt to judge 
others but " by their words and actions." Will he, however, con" 
tend, that every judgment formed on these grounds is candid and 
just? Words znA actions may, and do appear in different lights to 
different persons. They are often ambiguous and capable of a differ^ 
ent construction. They are often mistaken. They are often mis- 
represented. On the ground of his words Jesus Christ was accused 
of blasphemy* On the ground of his actions ^' rhe holy one and just'> 
was charged with being a friend of publicans and sinners. Mr. 
Fuller, with propriety, therefore, grants, that we " ought to be cau- 
*' tious of judging others." The point, then, which remains for his 
calm and sober review, Snd which is open to the judgment of the pub- 
lic, is, whether he hath been cautious and candid ; whether miscon- 
ceptions have not deceived him : whether prejudices have not warped 
him: whether eagerness to establish his conclusion hath not be- 
trayed him into rashness, when writing concerning the Socinians ? 
Whether this hath not been the case, w^hcn he asserts that the ayenus 
lo,Socinianism is " a heart secrectly disaffected to the true character and 
*' government of God and dissatisfied with the gospel-way of sal« 
<' vation ?" If the heart be secretly disaffected, is not this a judgment 
-that goes beyond the evidence of words and actions ? If the heart bs 
secretly disaffected, how came Mr. Fuller to know it ? by what gift 
cf discerning spirits, and penetrating into the inward recesses of the 
mind, lying beyond the human ken ? To many, after all he has ad- 
vanced in defence of it, this wull appear " a presumptuous sentence 

proceeding from a presumptuous spirit." And in this decision 
as will be judged by his words and actions. 

In p. 39, and following, Mr. Fuller argues for the right of chr:s= 
*' tians to refuse communion with those who avow Socinian princi- 

pies, from the right of any individual to separate himself from any 

community, whose sentiments he considers in a similar light." 

F- It 



( 98 ) 

It is to be granted, 'that the christian, who would keep the com- 
mandments of Jesus, pure and undefiled, must have a right to do 
this; that is, to do his duty. The necessity of using this right 
ariseth, when any christian community assumes a power (which 
Mr. Fuller contends, they have a right to assume) of so incorporating 
their peculiar views of Christianity with the profession of it, and of 
blending them with their worship, that a conscientious man, who 
differs from them, and considers their sentiments and worship as 
corruptions of the gospel, can not join in their worship, or sub- 
scribe to their creed, with sincerity, and consistently with his obli- 
gations to maintain the gospel in its original simplicity and purity. 
But on the principles of protestants, of dissenters, among whom 
Mr. Fuller classes himself, and of Christianity, no individual chris- 
tian, no body of christians hath a right of so modelling the christian 
profession and worship, as to make it inconsistent with any sincere 
christian to join in it, or to bring themselves under a sense of obli« 
gation to exclude any such. If Mr. Fuller will justify a community 
of Calvinistic and Trinitarian dissenters in the claim and use of such 
a right, he must also grant, that the church of England, as a christian 
community, has also a right to exclude those, who do not believe 
all the thirty-nine articles. On the same ground the church of 
E-ome has a right to exclude those, who deny the doctrine of tran- 
substantiation, and the decrees of the council of Trent, or the creed 
of pope Pius, Each community excludes only those, whose senti- 
ments they consider as subversive of the gospel. Each community, 
in these cases, sets up a standard of Christianity, of its own framing. 
If this be not to become lawgivers and masters in the church of 
Christ, I know not what can answer the character. In these cases, 
not the gospel, as it lieth in the New Testament, becomes the rule 
of faith, but as it exists in the formularies and devotional services of 
certain churches : not the profession of faith in Christ, as our only 
master and lawgiver, is made the term of communion ; but an ac- 
quiescence in the right assumed by such a body of christians : not 
the belief of the New Testament, and taking that as the sole rule of 
our faith and practice; but a conformity to another rule, to another 
scheme of sentiments, offered, at least, as explanatory of it : to their 

gospd, 



( 99 ) 



gospel, or the gospel according to their views of it, is the prescribed 
term of fellowship. This is going much beyond the rule of com- 
munion laid down by the apostle, which is to receive one another 

as Christ also hath received us. Rom. xv. 7. From the New- 
Testament it is apparent, that professing their belief, that Jesus was 
the Christ or Messiah, was the only requisition, on which men were 
baptized and received into the christian church. On what authority 
can more be, now-a-days, insisted on; that the thing professed 

be Christianity?'' If any christian community hath received 
from Heaven a commission to demand more, let the credentials o£ 
its authority be produced. 

But Mr. Fuller urges, p. 40, that, to oblige a christian com- 
*^ munity to hold fellowship with persons, between whom and 
" themselves there is an entire want of concord, would be to chain 

down the whole christian world in slavery, and to establish the 

liberty of the individual at the expense of the society." — Will 
not Mr. Fuller grant, that cases may arise, when the liberty of the 
individual should be asserted and vindicated at the expense of the 
society ; as, when a society is governed by wrong principles, is 
actuated by the mere spirit of domination, and Its claims resolve 
themselves into usurpations ? Is not this the state of the individual 
negro ? Was it not the state of Martin Luther, and of many indi- 
vidual protestantSj vv^ith respect to the Popish hierarchy ? 

Again, can it be said that there is an entire >vanL of concord 
'* between those who believe that God is, and that he is the rewarcler 

of them that diligently seek hiui? between those to whom there 

is one Master and Saviour, one hope of their calling ? between 
" those v/ho are turned from idols to serve the living and true God, 

and to wait fbr his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the 

deiid, even Jesus, which delivereth us from the v/rath to come ?'* 
Tb.e violation of the concord, however, lieth not at the door of 
those, who would adhere to this simple faith, to these general prin- 
ciples ; but at their door, who would blend other principles with 
these, as of equal authority. 

Once more shall a christian community complain of sb.very, of 
infringe ment of its liberty, because it is brought back to the 
¥2 original, 



( 100 ) 



OTlginal, christian rule of fellowship; the acknowledgment of the 

divine mission of Jesus Christ; or that Jesus is the Christ? Is it 

slavery to conform itself to the authority of the great Lawgiver ? 

Is it slavery to adhere to that principle, on which he declared he 

would build his church ? Mat. xvi. 16, i8. If this be slavery, I 

will hug my chains, and boast in m.y slavery. 

Mr. Fuller will, probably, reply here in the words we have 

p. 41, viz. In our view, our opponents have renounced the prin- 
cipal ideas included in those primitive forms of confession, 

*' ' Jesus is the Christ,' ' Jesus Christ is the Son of God;* and as cha- 
rity itself does not require us to acknowledge and treat that as 
Christianity, which in our judgment is not so, we think it our 
duty, in love, and with a view to their conviction, both by our 

*' words and actions^ to declare our decided disapprobation of their 

*' principles.'* 

The actions, meant here, extend beyond discussion, reasoning, 
and remonstrance, which may all be conducted in a spirit of love, 
and yet strongly express a disapprobation of any principles, to a 
sentence of exclusion from communion. This sentence, it is plead- 
ed, is incurred by those, who " renounce the principal ideas included 

in the primitive forms of confession." Mr. Fuller's assertion 
amounts to a claim of right in a society, to explain scriptural 
forms, not for their own satisfaction only, but authoritatively, as a 
test of faith to others. On this principle these primitive forms may 
swell into a large body of metaphysical and abstruse theology. 
They may include, in the first instance, the Nicene creed. They 
may comprehend the Catholic faith, as cast into the paradoxical 
propositions of the Athanasian creed. They may divide into the 
five points, established in the decrees of the Synod of Dort, They 
may, in the church of England, expand into thirty-nine articles. 
They may be moulded, in the hands of a Committee of Missionaries 
to the South Seas, into twenty-one principles of religion. And by 
Mr. Fuller, there is no doubt, they may be digested into the Trini- 
tarian and Calvinistic systems. But where, we ask, is the authority 
for including in these primitive forms such a compass, variety, and 
multiplicity of principal ideas ? This is to make those forms to 

contain 



( 101 ) 



contain, not only primary and leading ideas, but a number of 
secondary, subordinate, and consequential ideas ; all which must be 
admitted to compleat the idea of Christianity, and be embraced as a 
term of communion. Where the line is to be drawn ; where the 
boundary is to be placed, between articles essential or nonessential 
to communion, it is not easy to say. Thus a single proposition, 
that Jesus is the Christy i,e, the anointed, or, an equivalent one, that 
Jesus Christ is the Son of God^ expressed in a few, plain terms, that 
have a clear, definite. «nd precise meaning, multiplies into a number 
ef intricate and abstruse points The simplicity of the first times 
of the gospel is destroyed : the scriptural formulary is lost in human 
formularies; and, as it hath been well expressed, " it becomes a 
" matter of much subtilty and wit for a man to be a christian." 
Yet the persons, who argue for including in these primitive forms 
all they deem " principal ideas, lay no claim to infallibility any 
more than their opponents." P. 41. It is surprising, that men 
can thus deceive themselves with an affectation of disclaiming, with 
a verbal renunciation of infallibility, when their conduct can be justi- 
fied on no other principle than really possessing it. It gives on.e 
concern to have occasion to remonstrate, on this subject, with, a 
gentleman, who is Dissenting and a Baptist Minister.] 



APPEN- 



i 



APPENDIX, 

[No. l/j 



ESSAY 

ON THE 

GROUNDS OF LOVE TO CHRIST. 



TO THE DIRECTORS OF THE THEOLOGICi^L 
KEPOSITOUY, 



GENTLEMEN, 

Your having given a place in your valuable 
Repository to the paper of X. Y. Z. on the Love of 
Christy is not only a mark of respect and distinction 
bestowed on that piece, but seems to carry with it 
an approbation of the hint with which the author 
closes, and to express your disposition to receive a 
candid and pertinent illustration of the point, which 
he wishes to see discussed, 

" I should be very happy, says he, to see, in one 
connected view, all that is said in the New 
" Testament respecting this duty (the Love of 
F 4 Christ 



f J 

Christ) and the explanation of those texts on tlie 
supposition that Jesus Christ was a mere man, 
incapable, of and from himself, of acting as he 
" did while on earth, if the divine spirit had not con- 
stantly animated, directed and assisted him." 
The difficulty stated by X. Y. Z. appears to me, 
as it does to him, to be serious and important ; and 
it is certainly of a popular nature, and will be a bar 
to the reception of strict Unitarian sentiments, par- 
ticularly, with those who exercise their warmer 
affections more than their cool judgment in m.atters 
of religion. It calls therefore for a full discussion. 
But, besides this, it is a pleasure to read, it is a plea- 
sure to consider and weigh the positions advanced 
by so candid and liberal a writer. May I be per- 
mitted therefore, through the channel of your mis- 
cellauy, to submit the following remarks to his con- 
sideration. 

I would begin with that mode of treating the 
question, which he proposes in the conclusion of hiv^ 
piece. F or this method is at once to come to the 
source, and fountain head, of all our obligations to 
the duty on which he has his diiEculties. The 
real question with us should be, not what motives 
to the love of Christ doth any particular scheme of 
sentiments concerning his person supply ; but, on 
what grounds do the seriptures recommend and- 
enforce it : and what doth the New Testament ap- 
pear to mean by this affection ? If is therefore very 

proper 



( 105 ) 

proper, and even a most direct way, of coraing to 
some clear and authoritative conclusion, to bring 
into a connected view, as X. Y. Z. wishes to be 
done, all the texts that speak of this duty. The re- 
view of these texts w^ill also suggest some remarks 
on what this writer hath oiFered on the subject. 

Gn collecting them together, it is obvious, that 
the texts, in which mention is made of the love of 
Christy divide themselves into two classes ; as the 
phrase may m.ean either his love to us, or our affec- 
tion to him. It is proposed therefore to follow this 
arrangement, as being both just and natural in itself ; 
and as the passages, under the first, will throw light 
upon those, which we shall bring forward under the 
second class. 

To begin with those passages, which speak of the 
love of Christ to mankind. The first texts which 
offer here arc the declarations of Christ concerning 
his love of his disciples, and his exhortations to them 
to love one another, as John xiii. 34. with ch. xv. 9, 
12, 13. A neiv commandment give I unto you, 

that ye, love one another ; as I have loved you^ 
" that ye also love one another. This is my com- 
^' mandmenty that ye love one another as I have 

loved you. Greater love hath no man than thisy 
" that a man lay down his life for his friend'^ 
Here Christ only asserts in general terms, the affec- 
tion which he bore to his di^^ciples, and exhibits it as 
a ground and model of that, which they should cul- 
F 5 / tivate 



( 106 ) 

tivate to one another. He characterlseth it^as com-- 
mon to his Father, himself, and liis disciples ; which 
was, as to its nature, the same in each. The affec- 
tion itself, and not the particular grounds or effects 
of it, is the point here represented and enforced. 
In the lasr of these verses our Lord does indeed point 
at one great proof of his affection, that of laying 
down his life for his friend^ in which way the Fa- 
ther's love to himself could not be expressed, but 
theirs to one another might be shown. This pass- 
age only proves, that the same disposition may exist 
in different minds on different principles, and be ex- 
ercised in different ways, Here is nothing, that leads 
lis to conceive of a prior existence in glory and 
dignity, as esse?itial cither to express Christ's love to 
mankind; or as the ground of our gratitude and love 
to him. Nay, it is remarkable, when Christ evidently 
intends here to refer to the highest pi'oof of his love, 
he speaks of it only as exerting itself in the same 
'way as one man can shew his love to another : He 
.speaks of his own death, as the death of a nian^ not 
as the humiliation of a being m.ore than human, or 
siiperangelicaL As far as the language of Christ 
here is particular and precise, it doth not correspond 
to the Arian notion. 

Nothing can be drawn particularly in favour of 
that sentiment from the descriptive manner, in which 
the apostle speaks of the love of Christ, Rom. viii. 
37. Wc are more than conquerors through him 

thai 



( 107 ) 

tliat loved us. In the preceding 35th verse the 
apostle speaks of the love of Christy not as an affcc- 
iion which he had testified by any particular acts, 
but as a blessing in which we have a present interest, 
and on which our hopes depend. JVho shall sepa- 
rate us from the love of Christ ? and it is ex- 
plained, ver. 39, by the love of God ivhich is in 
Christ Jesus our Lord. Here the language of the 
sacred writer is general, and applieth not to any 
particular and specific instances of Christ's love. 

The next text, to be alleged, is very clear and 
explicit. It not only speaks Oi the afFection, bat 
points to the chief instance, the great display of it. 
Gal. ii. 20. The life which I now live in the fleshy 
I Uve by the faith of the Son of God^ who loved rnc^ 
and gave himself for vie. To the same purp^^se is 
Eph. v. 2. 25. Walk i}i love as Christ also hath 
loved us^ and hath given himself an offering and a, 
sacrifice to God of a sweet sinelling savour^ ver, 25. 
Husbands love your wives^ even as Christ aJso loved 
the church and gave himself for it. To the like 
effect is the last passage to be quoted under this 
head : Lhito him that loved us^ andxvashed us from 
our sins in his own bloody ajid hath viade us king 
and priests unto God : to him be gloiy for ever. 
Amen. 

It is observable, that in these passages, where tli j 
love of Christ is set before us, a^ the object of our 
imitation, and the ground of our praises to him ; in 

I 6 these 



( 108 } 

these passages, where the wiiter explains it and 
dilates upon it, nothing is said of his having 

undertaken to assume a body, and to go through 
*^ the various trying scenes, v^ith which his hfe and 

death were attended," but the only instance of 
his love expressly mentioned is, that he gave hiin- 

^^^f fo^ if this act were the grand proof 

of his benevolence to us, the main and sufficient 
ground of our obligations to him. The principle, 
on which X. Y. Z. conceives Christ to be the object 
of our gi'atitude and love is not once mentioned : a 
perfect silence about it reigns through all these pas- 
sages. This is quite consonant to many other 
places, in which the love of Christ is not, in so many 
words, mentioned ; but in which his dying for us is 
spoken of with great emphasis ; and in which the 
stress is laid upon this instance of self-denial and 
benevolence, as the greatest he could give. See 
Mat. XX. 2a. Johnx. 11. 17. Gal. i. 4. Phil. ii. 8. 
I Tim. ii. 6. Tk. ii. 14. 1 Pet. i. 19. ch. ii. 24. 
1 John iii. 16. 

X. Y. Z. will, on reflection, own that this was a 
singular act of love and friendship to mankind, and 
must perceive, that the Unitarian sentiments preserve 
that very ground of love and gratitude to Jesus 
Christ, w^hich the New Testament exhibits, and from 
w^hich it derives its arguments and exhortations. 
In estimating this instance of Christ's affection to 
mankind, the circumstaaces and nature of his death 

should 



( 109 ) 



should be taken into consideration ; that he humbled 
himseh'" unto the death of the cross, a most painful, 
and above ail, a most ignominious death : that lie 
suffered, the just for the unjust, to bring us to God. 
To these circumstances, viz. the innocence of his 
character, and the kind of death he underwent, the 
sacred wiiters particularly refer, as heightening his 
condescension and friendship. But X. Y. Z. will 
observe, that the circumstance on which he lays the 
greatest stress, viz. a degradation from a glorious 
pre-exis tent state, though it should be supposed that 
it is implied in some representations of the character 
of Christ, yet is never even hinted at, when his 
deatli is spoken of : though so proper to cast a glory 
round it, as illustrating his grace and philanthropy^*. 

An 

" No christian,'^ says Mr. Fuller, " whose mind is not warped 
by system, can read such passages as the following without feel- 
ing a glow of sacred gratitude.^' Then quoting Heb. ii. 16. 2. 
Cor. viii. 9. Phil. ii. 6, &c. he adds, How foreign is this from 
" Dr. Toulmin's assertion, ' that the circumstance of Christ's de- 
*• gradation from a glorious pre-existent state is never hinted at, 
when his death is spoken of, though so proper to cast a glorv 
around it, as illustrating his grace and philanthrophy 1" Socinian- 

ism Indefens. p. 33, Mr. Fuller must suppose, that I and other 

Unitarians are strangely unacquainted v^ith the New Testament, if 
he conceive, that we are not apprised that such passages occur in it» 
We acknowledge them. We respect the sentiment they convey. 
And we feel a glow of gratitude kindled by it; But it doth not 
lience follow, that they teach the doctrine of the pre-existence, and 
of a degradation from the glory and honour of that state. The tv/o 
last certainly represent oiu' Lord Je§u5 ss existing in circumstances 

of 



( no ) 



An Arian, it is evident from the feelings wiiidi 
X. Y. Z. expresses, would not have written in 
this strain, would not have omitted a consideration, 

on 

of glory and power, and displaying humility and condescension in 
not availing himself of those circumstances to tlie full extent : but 
they do not declare, that these were circumstances of his being before 
he was born. We conceive, that the mind must be warped by 
system, or that the thoughts must take a direction from som^ 
opinion previously received, to find tlie doctrine of the pre-exist- 
encc in them. It is a fact, that the Translators sat down to their 
work of renderinfij these pnssag"s into English, and that almost all 
christians have hrst read them, with minds possessed with this no- 
tion and have applied it, without suspicion of its fiuing, as a key 
to their meaning. To me it seems most natural a-ud probable, there- 
fore, that one who h^d never heard of the doctrine of a splendid 
condition of being before tlie appearance of Christ in this world, 
would, on reading these passageSj see no more in them, than a refer- 
rence to circumstances which fell within the observation of the be- 
holders ; than an appeal to powers possessed, and to a condescension 
and self-denial practised, in one and the same state of being : to an 
examplejof great humility displayed before men, in connection with 
great eminence and dignity of prerogatives and character ; for the 
words strictly and plainly express no more. They more than inti- 
mate, that the self-abasement and humiliation were to be estimated 
by a contrast with a visible, conspicuous glory and greatness; both 
being, at the same time, before the spectators. The phrase, the form 
of God, denotes not the internal nature or substance of any being ; 
but only some external form, scheme, figure, or appearance. Dan. v. 
6, 9, 10. Mark xvi. 12. To speak of the supreme, eternal, unchange- 
able Being: of God, as being in the for??: of God\ is glaringly absurd 
and irreverent. Christ, says Ambrose, as quoted by Erasmus, was 
then in the form of God.^ when he raised the dead, restored hearing to 
the deaf, and cleansed the lepers,— As to Heb. ii. 16. The reader 
will, on examinatioHj perceive^ that this quotation is^not pertinent 

ta 



( in ) 



on his scheme, so important and forcible. And 
it is inconceivable, that the sacred writers, if 

they 

to the purpose for which it is alleged. The word, nature, he will 
see by the difference of the character, is not in the original. A 
more correct translation would be, as Dr. Whitby, Bp. Fell, and 
the margin of some Bibles have it, he laid yiet hold of angels, but he 
laid hold of the seed of Abraham ; i. e. to help them. " The word,'* 
saith Leig!i(i), signides to catch anyone who is either running 
" away, or fallen on the ground, or into a pit; to fetch back or 
" recover again." So that it doth not at all refer to any change 
which the person of Chrii^. underwent, nor express his assumption 
of another nature into union with himself ; but the assistance, the 
help he extended to mankind, but not to angels. Angels w^ere 
not under the power of death, nor under the fear of death ; and 
*' therefore stood in no need of his helping hand, as mankind 
did." In a word, for w^hat Mr. Fuller has advanced, I still 
think myself correct in saying, that the circumstance of Christ's 
degradation from a glorious pre-existent state is never hinted at 
when his dea'.h is spoken of especially, when it is spoken of as 
a proof of his love and the grounds of ours. 

Mr. Fuller asks, " if Dr. Toulmin wished to answer his nth 
Letter, why he did not prove, that the original digyiity of Christ's 
*' character is never represented as the ground of love to him ?" 

^- 33- answering, Mr. Fuller means a distinct reply to 

every thing advanced in that Letter, he will perceive that I did not 
wish to do it, because I have not attempted it. But I conceive, that 
a connected, fair view of all that is said of the love of Christ in the 
New Testament, m.ust be a virtual and decisive ansv/er to that Let- 
ter, or to any other essay on the subject, the writer of which hath 
gone beyond the authority of scripture in representing the grounds 
of that affection. I have shewn, by a particular induction of texts, 
what the scriptures have said upon this head : and it is very dan- 

[ Critica Sacra ; sec also Poli Synopsis iji locunT] 

gerous 



f 112 ) 



they had entertained similar ideas, would have 
written as they have done. 

These 

gerous, onthisorany other point, which depends purely on revela- 
tion, to advance beyond it. 

The iith Letter, to which Mr. Fuller refers, brings forward a 
great number of texts, quoted in his usual way, as the sound of the 
words and the popular application of them dictate. On which he 
asks, " V/hich of the systems in question has the greatest tendency 
^' to promote such a spirit of love to Christ as is here exemplified ; 
that which leads us to admire these representations, and on various 
occasions to adopt the same expressions : cr that which employs 
us in coldly criticising away their meaning ; that which leads us- 
Vv^ithout fear to give them their full scope, or that whichj while 
*' we are honouring the Son, would affright us, lest we should in so 
^' doingdishonour the Father(i) ?" The excellence of a system., then, 
is to be tried, not by its foundation in sober truth, but by its power 
to move the affections, and to raise our feelings to the highest tone. 
Here Popery, with its decorations and pictures and shows, with the 
oratory ef its preachers, holdhig in their hands and displaying to 
their hearers a crucifix, will have the advantage of the cold addresses 
of Protestantism. Here superstitious idolatry, by its pomp and 
splendor and sacrifices, will recommend, as more attractive than 
the simple spiritual worship of Christianity, itself. But as Mr. 
Fuller observes (2), " all that appearance of reverence and devotion, 
which is the offspring of superstition, oris promoted by falsehood, 
v^^ili be found to be something at a great remove from piety or 
*' devotedness to love. Let me then adhere to that religion which 
" is a reasonable service. Rom. xii. 3. Let me seek that my love 
may abound in knowledge and all judgment.'^' Phil. i. 9. It is 
an apostolic exhortation, "be not children in understanding ; in 
understanding be mcn.'^ i Cor. xiv. 20. The careful exami- 

[(1) Calvinlst and Socinian Systems compared, p. 216, 1st. edit.] 



[(2) P. 288 J 



nation 



( 113 ) 



These remarks ofFera solution of the diiKciiIty, 
\N liIch X.Y. Z. intimates, when he says : Nor do 

" I see 

riation of the sense of scriptures, hence, becomes a duty. But it 
falls under a censure with Mr. Fuller, as " coldly criticising away 
" their meaning.*' To have been correct he should not have said 
iheir meaning : but the meaning ascribed to them by himself and 
many other christians. This may not be their true meaning : unless, 
in their applications of scripture, they are governed by an unerring, 
infallible Spirit. Till this is proved to be the case, we'may be al- 
3ov/ed to doubt their sense : and the only way to settle the inter- 
pretatioM of disputed texts is that of investigating their meaning by 
a careful examination, directed by judicious and sober criticism % 
which Mr. Fuller may, if he please, call cold criticism : but which 
we shall still deem wisdom, and our duty to follow, that v/e may 
^' give them their true full scope," and stop there. Mr. Fuller is 
superior to any fears of going beyond it : he is superior to any ap- 
prehei'.sions of his emotions of gratitude andjove to Christ infringing 
upon his regards to God, the Father. With him it is the proof of 
the excellence of a system, that it preserves him from being ^' af- 
" frighted, lest in so doing he should dishonour the Father." It 
may be so with him. Remembering the werds of Christ, My 

Father is greater than I," I envy not his security and confidence. 
He will permit others to think, that there is ground for holy fear 
and caution. He v/iil permit others to recollect, and govern them» 
selves by the recollection, that we are commanded to love God with 
an entire affection. He wdll permit others to regulate their views 
and affections, in this instance, by the example of Christ: who ex- 
pressly declared; " I honour my Father. I seek not my" own 

glory." Here he will permit others to preserve a subordinacy! 
a subserviency, in their regards even to their Lord and Saviour, to 
those higher regards, which they owe to their Father and his 

Father, to their God and his God ;" because He is exalted, because 
every tongue is to confess him, and every kmc to hw to him, to the 
c LORY Of God the Father.. It is, therefore, the excellence of 

thai; 



( 114 ) 



I see why, on Unitarian principles, Jesus Christ is' 
the object of a Christianas gratitude and love, any 
more than, under the Jewish dispensation, Moses 
was the object of these affections to the Jew^s/* 
From what has been advanced, it is plain, there was 
a marked difference between the two characters. 
Moses did not die for his country. He practised 
indeed a noble self-denial for their sake : but he did 
not sacrifice his life in their cause. Nor, as I recol- 
lect, is he ever once held up to the Israelites as the 
object of their love. He was the virtuous, disin- 
terested lawgiver ; a character deserving great re- 
spect : Christ was the sufferings dying friend ; a 
character which insinuates itself into the heart, and 
constrains afFection. 

There is another material point of difference In 
the two cases. Moses promised an inheritance to 
the Israelites, but did not himself come to a share in 
the possession : and his personal connexion with 
them ceased at his death. Between Christ and his 
disciples there subsists a common in terest^ as well as 
one common nature ; a joint participation in the 
same titles, privileges and inheritance r they are his 
brethren ; after his resurrection he avowed the re- 

that system, which he would depreciate, that it makes that^ in the 
government of the religious affections, the ultimatum, which is so 
in reason and the gospel ; that it creates and cherishes a care to give 
supreme, unrivalled honour and glory to the one God the Fat he 
of whom, through whom, and to whom are all things."] 

lation, 



( 115 ) 

iatioii ; on the great day he will avow it. His God 
is our God ; his Father is our Father : we are tlie 
sons of God, as well as he^ was : we zxq joint-heirs 
with him. He is indeed unseen : he is removed from 
us : but as he died, so he arose again for us : he 
entered into heaven as oin^ forerunner : he will come 
^gain to our salvation, and to take us into a share of 
his throne and glory. We have still much to hope 
from him ; nay, the noblest blessings to receive frotn 
him. These are endearments^ these are bonds of 
affection, which did not subsist between Moses and 
the Israelites : and which, be it added, are in a man- 
ner undermined by the Arian scheme. For this 
represents Christ, not properly as our elder brother^ 
but as a glorious being, originally, to an inconceiva- 
ble degree, above us ; and who must be considered, 
even notwithstanding his humiliation, as retaining 
his natural high prerogatives. On that scheme we 
may look up to him with reverence and gratitude ; 
but astonishment and awe must mingle with our 
affection, and must take much from the softness, 
pleasure and endearment of it. The love of him, as 
our brother^ cannot be felt : the gentle, winning 
attractions of his humiliation are overpowered by the 
glories of his first dignity : the thought of what was 
human^ though the New Testament frequently holds 
up that to our consideration, and lays great stress 
upon it, is lost iathe contemplation of v%'hat was 
sifperaiigclical. 71ie former is scarcely compatible, 

certainly 

4 



( n6 ) 

certainly does not easily and naturally harmonise, 
with the latter • 

We next proceed to review the texts^ which speak 
of our love of Clirist., Ilie first under this class is 
Mat. X. 37. He that loveth father or mother 
more than me is not •worthy of vie . and he that 
loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy 
of me : i. e. as the words are paraphrased by Dr. 
Clark, when things come to this extremity, that a 
" man must either lose the friendship of the dearest 
relations, or forsake his religion ; all earthly and 
temporal considerations must yield to the one 
thing necessary, of securing an eternal interest. 
For whosoever shall prefer the love of a father or 
mother, or brother or sister, before true religion 
and virtue ; cannot be a sincere disciple of Christ, 
or be accounted v/orthy to be admitted into the 
kingdom." Or, as Dr. Doddridge glosses on the 
words, he who loveth father or mother more than 
me^ and is induced by his regard to them to dis- 
obey my precepts, or renounce my doctrine, is not 
w^oithy of me." The justness of this explanation 
of the love of Christ is established by the language 
used in the context, where our Lord enforces the 
confessing him before men, and warns against de- 
nying him before men ; but especially by the cha-» 
racteristics of a true disciple, which he lays down 
ver. 38. viz. taking up his cross and following 
after hliii." Such a love of Christ, it must be 

alio we dj, 



f in ) 

allowed, is not peculiar, or appropriate to any specu- 
lative ideas formed concerning his original dignity ; 
but common to and practicable upon all schemes. 

In -some other places tlie love of Christ is, by our 
divine master himself, represented as consisting in 
obedience to him, or as deriving from obedience its 
essential nature. Ifyc love vie^ keep my CGVimand- 
ments. He that hath my commandments and 
keepeth them.^ he it is that lovethme ; if ayiy man 
love me^ he will keep my words ; he that loveth me 
not^ keepeth not my sayings. John xiv. 13, ^^l, 23, 
21-. Now w^hat is in other places represented as the 
rround of this obedience ? no other than this, the 
authority with v/hich Christ acted. Thus Peter; 
Moses truly said^ a prophet shall the Lord your 
Ood raise up unto you^ of your brethren^ like unto 
me, him shall ye hear in all things whatever he 
shall say unto you. Thus the voice from heaven 
declared : " This is my beloved Son^ in zchom^ I am 

well pleased i hear ye him^ Mat. xvii. ^. 

In the 28th verse, it is true, the love of Christ is 
represented as an affection, which will give those 
who possess it a sensible interest iii what relates to 
the dignity and happiness of their ma^ster. But then 
the ground or incentive to this generous sympathy, 
which Christ express eth an expectation of meeting 
with in his disciples, is not any prior glory, but his 
future exaltation. 

He refers this influence of their love, not back to 

anv 



( 118 ) 

any past period of his being for its cause, but, forward 
to a future event. " If ye loved me, ye would re- 

joice, because I said I go unto my Father, for my 

Father is greater than I." 

These remarks may be applied to ascertain the full 
force of that passage, which X. Y. Z. considers as 
deserving of particular notice. 1 Cor. xvi. 22. If 

any man love not the Lord Jesus Christy let him be 
Anathema Mar anaiha. X. Y. Z. it may be pre- 
sumed, judges that the awful denunciation, with 
which the love of Christ is here enforced, implieth 
that there is a peculiar criminality, an aggravated sin, 
in not loving the Lord Jesus Christ. This is to be 
granted. But doth it therefore follow, that the guilt 
of it is to be estimated only, or principally by the 
idea of a pre-existent glory, which he laid aside for 
our sakes ; and which condescension was a peculiar 
claim to our gratitude ? The apostle doth not assert, 
he doth not even insinuate, this. For, while the 
nature of a Christian's love to his Master is w^ell 
ascertained by the former passages to consist in obe- 
dience ^to his precepts, and in an attachment to his 
cause, the ground of this duty, it is intimated by the 
apostle, is not any character supported by Christ be- 
fore the world was, but the character he sustained 
after his appearance on earth, especially after his 
resurrection, when he was made Lord and Christ^'. 

For 

* Hunc titulum addit, ut causam inslnuet ob quam Jesum 
Christum diligere debeamus, & nisi id faciamus merito simus ana- 

themate 



f 119 ) 



For this is the obligation, at which the apostle points 
by the language, which he uses concerning his mas- 
ter: our Lord Jesus Christy i.e. him^ who is sat 
down at the right hand uf God : him^ w^ho is exalted 
to be a Prince and a Saviour. X. Y. Z. perhaps, may 
deem power and authority to be improperly con- 
sidered as a gromid of /c>t;^. And this must be aU 
lowed, if by love we mean only the animal passion ; 
but if, as it appears from the preceding passages to 
he the case, we understand by it the rational affec- 
tion, or rather an attachment to the doctrine and 
obedience to the precepts of Christ, authority is the 
proper ground of it : from hence doth the obligation 
to it arise ; especially when it is power lodged in the 
hands of a benevolent person, and authority invested 
in tht friend and saviour. 

One text, Avhich maybe considered as very impor- 
tant in this discussion, is Ephesians iii. 14, 17, 18, 19. 
For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of 
mir Lord Jesus Christ — that Christ may die ell in 
your hearts by faith ; that you being rooted and 
grounded in love^ may be able to comprehend, with 
nil saints what is the breadth and lengthy and depth 
Mud height, and to know the love of Christ which 
passeth knoxvledge. Here the language of the apos- 

themate ferlendi. Quis enim non debeat amare suum dominum a 
dextris Dei scdentenij saum Redemptorem et Servatorem ? Quis si 
hoc non faciat, non mereatur ut anathema sit ? et si eura etiam 
dominum suum esse abneget, ut anathema sit maranatha ? Vide 
Slichtingium in loc. 



( 120 ) 

tie Is so full and energetic, that some may suppose 
the idea of Christ's voluntary degradation from a 
former state of glory must be admitted, to justify the 
force and strength of it. But a more careful inspec- 
tion of the passage will show this to be a mere sup- 
position. Now, not to say that the love of Christ 
cannot necessarily be understood to mean other, than 
the love of God by Christ * ; the love of which he 
is the revealer and instrument, it is plain, that though 
the apostle meant the benevolence exercised by Christ 
himself, yet he did not refer to the labour and con- 
descension, at the expense of which Christ hath serv-= 
ed our eternal interest; but to the benefits of redemp- 
tion : to the blessings secured and imparted, and not 
to the humiliation and sulierings by wdiich they were 
secured. It appears from the context, ver. 1 — 12. 
that the apostle's mind laboured with the subject 
which offered to his thoughts. What was this sub- 
ject ? Not the condescension of Christ; but the 
mystery, which from tire beginning of the world had 
been hid with God, tht preaching to the Gentiles 
the unsearchable riches of Christ. On this account 
it was, that he bowed his knees to the Father of cur 
Lord Jesus Chi'ist, that they might know the love of 
Chr ist : or the vast extent of the christian scheme of 

* Charitas Christie id est, qua a Deo per Christum diligimur, quas 
Dei quidem est, sed quia a Christo nobis revelata et oblata est, ideo 
charitas vel gratia Christi dicitur, ad Rom. i. i^* and viii. 35. con- 
fer eum, 39« Vide Crdiium in loc. 

grace ; 



( 121 ) 



grace ; its unlimited influence, and comprehensive 
reach. 

Another passage to which, in this enquiry, we 
must advert, is Ephes. vi. 24. Grace be with all 
them that love our Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity. 
Or with incorruption^ as it is in the margin of our 
bibles. Mr. Locke's note^ on this text, as just and 
preciscj deserves attention. In this epistle to the 
*^ Ephesians, Paul sets forth the gospel as a dispen-» 
*^ sation^o much, in every thing, superior to thelawj^ 

that it was to debase, corrupt, and destroy the gos-^ 

pel, to join circumcision and the observances of the 
*^ law as necessary to it. Having written this epis- 
*^ tie to this end, he here, in the close, having the 

same thought still upon his mind, pronounces 

favour on all those who love the Lord Jesus Christ 
*^ in incorruption^ \. e. without mixing or joining 

any thing with him in the work of our salvation, 
*^ that mayrender the gospel useless and ineffectual." 

The only text, which remains to be produced under 
this head, is 1 Pet. i. 8. Whom having not seen ye 
love. The only idea, on the subject, peculiar to this 
clause, is that of the circinnstance which set off to 
advantage the affection which the christians, whom 
Peter addressed, felt towards their divine master; 
namely, that it was not aided and invigorated by a 
personal acquaintance with its object. But this pas- 
sage suggests nothing particular concerning the nature 
and obligations of our love to Christ. And though 
. G ' in 



( 1^2 ) 



in the context there Is an express and animated repre- 
sentation of benefits derived to us through Jesus 
Christ, or to be communicated at his appearance, yet 
there is no reference to the principle which X. Y. Z. 
conceives to He at the foundation of love to Christ. 
The apostle insists upon the resurrection of Christ, 
and on his appearaiice again^ but as to his coming 
into this wqrld^ from a prior and more exalted state 
of being, he is silent about it. 

Thus we have placed together, in one connected 
view, all that is. said in the New Testament concern- 
ing this duty, the love of Christ, except one passage : 
in which there is an ambiguity ; but an ambiguity 
that doth not affect this argument, but only makes 
it uncertain to which class of texts, in our arrange* 
ment, it belongs ; whether to those that speak of the 
affection of Christ towards us, or of ours towards him. 
It Is in 2 Cor, v. 14. 15. The love of Christ con- 
straineth us : because we thus Judges thai if one 
died for ally then were all dead : and that he diedfor 
ally that they who liv e , should not henceforth live 
un to themselves^ hut unto himx^ho diedf or them and 
rose again. But which ever way the language of 
the apostle, in the first clause, is explained, the follow- 
ing clauses amply state the ^roi^n^/, on which the sen- 
timents of love and gratitude to Christ were felt and 
cultivated : This is no other, than dying for us. 

On the survey of the whole, it is remarkable, that^ 
the love of Christ isj in every passage, represented 

and 



( 123 ) 



and enforced without any regard to, and totallij in-^ 
dependent of, the consideration of his having left a 
former state, and relinquished any prior glory. I 
should conceive therefore, that if strict Unitarian 
principles have any tendency to abate the love and 

reverence which have hitherto appeared to X.Y. Z. 

to be due to Jesus Christ," it must proceed not 
from these principles themselves, but from the asso- 
ciation, that has long existed in his mind, being dis- 
solved by embracing those principles. The texts we 
have enumerated, exhort and persuade to the love of 
Christ on principles very distinct and remote from 
the idea of his pre-exi^tence in circumstances of great 
power and glory. These principles are therefore to 
be deemed the just, sufficient, and indeed only scrip- 
tiiral grounds of that affection. If they do not beget 
aud cherish lively sentiments of love and gratitude to 
Jesus Christ, the defect must be, not in the princi- 
ples, but in the jnind ; which, having but lately re- 
ceived them, doth not yet feel the full force of them- 

It often strikes me, that Arian christians are so 
accustomed to consider the character and condescen- 
sion of Christ, in connexion .with their idea of his 
former dignity ; they are so habituated to ascribe in- 
a manner, all the merit and excellence of his benevo- 
lence to his quitting that dignity, that they seem to 
overlook the condescensions and humility of his de« 
portment, the benevolent part whicli he acted on 
earth," and his dying for us y on v/hich last great 
G 2 ins lance 



. " ' C 124 ) 

instance of his friendshipj as we have seen, the scrip- 
tures lay the stress ; and the consideration of which 
they cxhibitj detached hy itself ^ without represent- 
ing it as deriving its merit from a contrast with his 
former glory. Upoij the Arian scheme it should seem, 
Christ cannot be supposed to jook upon death with 
the sentiments and, feelings of a man. He must 
have been a stranger to the natural love of life ; to 
that strong attachment to the present state- of being, 
of which WQ are conscious : for the continuance of 
life would present to him nothing worthy the desire 
of so exalted a being. To die, in his case v/as, on 
that scheme, to resume his dignity ; to be delivered 
from the body, which he had a^^umed. Under these 
circumstances, what self-denial, what saciifice could 
it be in Him^ to give up his life ? 

Should it be urged, that to represent the benevo-- 
lence as principally consisting in his submission to 
the death of the cj oss, without taking in the consi- 
deration of his prior glory, is to reduce his benevo-^ 
lence to a level with that of many other men^ who 
have willingly met death in its worst forms, for the 
sake of truth and human happiness ; it may, in reply, i 
be asked, when this argument is brought forward, ' 
is not what was peculiar to the case of Christ, for- 
gotten ? Is it not forgotten, that, as he himself said^ 
when he was apprehended5 he could have prayed to 
his Father, and thereupon he would have sent le- 
gions of angels to rescBe him that no man 

took 



( 125 J 

*^ took his life from him, but that he laid it down 
of himself These cjcpressions denote that Christ 
ijvas not, a mete passive instrument : hut that he 
acted in hk great character with a benevolent design, 
and prefetted the accomplishing the kind purposes of 
it, in the ftalkst eKtentj to the preserYation of his life, 
though he could have preserved it with honour and 
piety ; though he could have procured a siipernatiiral, 
consequently a glorious, interposition in his favour. 
The remark of X. Y. Z. with respect to the use 
Christ made of his ifiiraculous powers, viz. **That 
" it cannot be on any ground supposed, that the 
same divine energy would have attended Christ 
on the supposition of its having been possible for 
" him to have attempted the application of it to any 
purpose, directly opposite to those for which it 
was bestowed and his more general observation, 
*^ I cannot suppose, that our Saviour had it in his 
*^ power to have defeated the purposes of infinite 
wisdom, by which he was continually directed.'* 
These remarks, I apprehend, may be retorted and 
applied with equal force to the Arian sentiments 
On that scheme, he was in actual possession of glo- 
ry and power, more than human or angelic, before 
the world was ; which the counsels of divine bene- 
volence required him, for a time, to relinquish and 
ky aside. Had he it in his power to counteract those 
purposes, by declining to assume a body, and to go 
through the various trying scenes^ with which his 
G. a life 



. f 126 ) 

life and death would be attended ? Or if he were a 
voluntary agent in relinquishing this dignity, why 
ought he not to be considered as equally so in dexli- 
ning to avail himfelf of his miraculous powers to 
answer any purposes of ambition , and in giving up 
his life for mankind ? 

For though he did not by his own power perform 
the works, but his Father^ who was with him, did 
them ; y^t the consciousness of such an energy at- 
tending him, the consciousness that God heard 

him always,*' was to one, who was in all points 
tempted like as we are, a strong temptation to pride 
and ambition. The effects, the glorious displays, of 
this energy gave him an amazing infiiience^ which 
was in itself a powerful temptation to swerve from 
the great ends of his mission. But he was superior 
to these snares : and, in this view„ have not his self- 
denial, humility, and death, singular merit* ? In a 
wwd, on the Arian or Unitarian scheme, Christ was 
as really a voluntary agent in the execution of the 
divine purposes, as are any of us in the common 
spheres of life. The merit and glory of an agent, 
acting from motives of benevolence, freely embark- 
ing in a great and noble design, and, in the prosecu- 
tion of it, meeting with reproach, poverty, sufferings, 
and death, are justly to be given to him: and bring 
us under the obligations of love and gratitude, 

* See these thoughts pursued and illustrated with great force, by 
the excellent Dr, PricCt in his Sermoii$, p. 357—360, 

These 



( 121 ) 

Tliese remarks are submitted to X. Y, Z, and it is 
referred to him, whether the love of Christ doth not 
^tand in the scriptures, wholly independent of the 
idea of his preexistent glory. That idea may he 
sallowed to supply a motive, a ground for the duty - 
but the duty ariseth from other considerations ; and 
wherever it Is, mentioned, is not mculcated by that 
.afgument, 

PHILOSOTER, 



4 



[APPENDIX, 



(No. %) 

IN LETTERS TO A FRIEND. 



LETTER L 

Dear Sir^ 

An attempt, you are sensible, has been made, to 
parry oiF the force of the geaeral argument stated in 
the preceding Letters. . It has been sald^ that I have 
^' rejected the ground of argument used by the 
author of * The C'alvlnlstic and Socinian Schemes 
Compared,' and thus have given up the contro- 
*^ versy, as it respects the moral efficacy of prin- 
ciples I have been represented as studiously 
evading Mr. Fuller's argument f : as endeavour- 
ing to shift the ground of controversv, and, 
without refuting a single argum^ent advanced by 

[* Protestant Dissenter's Magazine for June. lygS^ p. 30 j 
[f Evangelical Magazine for January, I f97 J p,, j8 J 

c 5 Mr. 



( 130 ) 



Mr. Fuller, contenting myself with showing, that 
the preaching of the Apostles produced the hap- 
piest effects ; and then assuming that they were 
Unitarians, attributing these effects to the Socinian 
doctrine*." Mr. Fuller himself has laboured to 
possess his readers with the same view of my piece. 
So far," he says, from trying the strength of his 
arguments, I have not so much as looked him in 
the face. On the contrary," he adds, though 
the practical efficacy of the Unitarian doctrine is 
the title of his performance, yet he acknowledges 
*^ his design is to supersede the examination of that 
*^ comparison into which I had fully entered :— that 
is, to relinquish the defence of the practical efficacy 
of his principles, and reason upon another 
ground t " He charges me, therefore, witk 
begging the question, shifting the ground of the 
controversy, and virtually giving up my cause as 
indefensible J." 

It is no unusual thing for writers, to consider the 
answers they have received as not coming home to 
the arguments, which they have urged. Dr. Morgan^ 
in the second volume of " The Moral Philosopher,"^ 
assured his readers, that Dr. Leland, who was a 
judicious and close respondent^ had not said one 

[* The same for October, 1797 .] 
[f Socinianiara Indefensible, p. 6.] 



It p. i i 



word 



r 131 ) 



word to the purpose; and that which he had 
offered against him was mere impertinent declama- 
tion and harangue. The verdict, which an author, 
or his friends, pass on the performances of his oppo- 
nents, comes under a suspicious form. It is not aa 
unbiassed sentence. It may be the mere exultation 
of self-applause. . It may proceed from the partiality 
of self-love. It may be art, to prejudice readers 
against the respondent : or it may be a friendly in- 
terference to prevent their attention being given to 
a pieccy which, through the impertinence of the 
argument, would only mislead them. The duty of 
readers, to w^hom the subject of the controversy 
appears important and interesting, and who would 
form a just judgment of the respective merits of the 
combatants, is to read and compare the respective 
pieces for themselves. 

These remarks apply, with propriety, to the present 
ease : on which various and discordant opinions are 
before the puT)lic. Mr. Fuller, it may be presumed, 
has great satisfaction in having his own judgment 
€oncerningm.y argument confirmed, as we have seen, 
by the sentence of his seconds. But I can also allege 
testimonies in favour of the strength and pointedness 
of my reasonings, to sanction my self-applause, and 
my assuming the tone of victory. One is pleased ta 
speak of me as writing " with great perspicuity, 
" candor and good sense : and as show^ing by a 
" series of pertinent quotations and judicious illustra^ 
G 6 ^« tions^ 



( 132 ) 



tion§5 that it was the preaching of the simple 
Unitarian doctrine, which first brought men* to 
faith and repentance, and christianized the 
world Another represents the ^' Letters to 

Mr. Fuller" as entering into a dispassionate and 
judicious enquiiy into the influence of the prm» 
ciples, which they defend ; and. In a strain of 
*^ perspicuous and solid reasoning, Intermixed with 
animated appeals to the example of some eminent 
and'worthy characters, which have adorned our 
own country, in later times, completely repelHng 
the attack of his opponent f,'* Whose are the 
pens, to whom the author of the letters owes this 
verdict, " which Mr. Fuller, and the admirers of Ms 
tract, naturally deny to him, he knoweth not. 
Though it may not become him to pronounce on the 
justice of It, yet it showrs, that, notwithstanding the 
decided and triumphant manner, in which Mr. Fuller 
and the partlzans of his sentiments have spoken of the 
inaptness and deficiency of the argument in the 
Letters,'* the matter admits a different opinion : 
and those who have not read either his treatise, or 
the " Letters,'* or one only of those publications, 
would do well, if they feel any interest in the ques- 
tion, to k:eep their judgment, amidst such a contra- 
riety of opinion, suspended, till they can calmly read 

Analytical Review for October, 1796, p. 395, 96.] 
I; f New Annual Register for 1796, Domestic Literature^ p. 2 80.3 



both 



( 13S ) 

both, and determine for themselves, where the truth 
lieth. 

It is not, however, incompatible with this appea^ ' 
to the judgment of the candid and impartial reader, 
for the author of the « ' Letters'' to offer some remarks 
in favour of his own mode of arguing. 

It is alleged, that, by endeavouring to give 

evidence from some other source of argument than 
*' that which he professes to answer, he is guilty of 
" shifting the ground of the controversy, and, by so 

doing, virtually gives up his cauae as indefensi- 

ble*." 

This remark is irrelevant to the question. The 
title of the Letters'' and the author's declaration of 
his design, p. S, 4, show, that he did not intend, nor 
did profess, to give a full and minute answer to Mr. 
Fuller's tract. He meant not much more than to 
take an occasion^ from that publication, to bring the 
general question, viz. the practical efficacy of the 
Unitarian doctrine, to the test of scriptural facts. 
Mr. Fuller, of all men, it appears to him, has the 
least right to censure him for giving the preference 
to one out of several modes of discussing the question 
before us r since he himself selected one ground of 
reasoning in preference to others which offered. 
The author of the " Letters" hath only availed him- 
self of the liberty to which he, as well as Mr. Fuller, 
had a claim ; that of discussing a general question 
on principles, that meet their own views and tastes. 



£ ^ Socinianism Indefensible, p« S.] 



( 134 ) 

The source of argument, which he adopteJs^- 
appeared to him to have much the advantage of that 
which Mr. Fuller hag pursued. It is more concise^ 
than his mode of discussing the point. It is more 
pertinent and appropriate^ because it is an appeal to 
the effects, produced by certain principies^ in~ the 
fir^t and purest exhibition of them;^ when they were 
not encumbered with heterogeneous speculations, or 
mingled with notions not immediately and directly 
connected with them ; such are the sentiments con- 
tained in the passages brought forward from various 
authors by Mr, Fuller. It is more decisive and aii^ 
thoritative : for it is derived directly from, the scrip- 
tures, and from examples, that are incontrovertible; 
And^ in this mode of argument, there is nothing in- 
vidious ; it is candid. It introduces no odious com- 
parisons between one scheme of sentiments and ano- 
ther; between one party of christians and another: 
as dolh Mr. Fuller's tract, which i$,. throughout, the 
argumeyitum ad invidiam a mode of arguing very 
unfavourable to candour and fair discussion, savouring 
of spleen and ill-nature, principally calculated to 
misrepresent and irritate, and evidently * designed to 
fix an opprobium and disgrace*. 

[ * See an excellent tract by Le Clerc, entitled Dissertatro Phi- 
losophica de Argumento Theologico ab Invidia ducto : which pole 
. mical divines would do well to read, before they take in hand the 
pea of controversy. Optra Philosophical V. i* p. Hi — 280.] 

rt 



( 135 ) 

It is, also, a recommendation of the source of ar- 
gument, from whence the Letters" are derived^ 
that, though it doth not involve in it a direct com- 
parison between the rehgious character of the Unit- 
arian and the Calvinist, it is conclusive with respect 
to what is proposed by such a comparison: for if it 
be the fact, that by the simple Unitarian doctrine 
men were brought to faith and repentance, and the 
world was christianized^ the excellence and ejfEcacy 
of the doctrine is sufficiently evinced; without bring- 
ing another doctrine into competition. It matters 
not'what can be urged from the present, supposed, or 
apparent, inefficacy of this doctrine. That inefficacy 
must arise from other causes than from the nature of 
the doctrine. According to the parable of the sower, 
how various and opposite are the effects of sowing one 
and the same seed ; " the word of the kingdom 
In one. instance the fowls devoured the seed : in 
another it withered away, because it had not root ; 
in a third it was choaked by thorns : and, where it 
brought forth fruit, the produce was in different 
proportions. All these effects took place where one 
and the same seed was sown. The spectator, who, 
in viewing the different results of the same operation 
of sowing, should have drawn any comparison from 
the different cases with respect to the quality and 
vegetative force of the seed itself, would not have 
argued justly. So it impeaches neither the excel- 
lence; nor the energy of any truth; that it hath not, 

with 



with respect to all persons, nor with respect to all 
timeSj the same influence. The gospel is the same 
yesterday, to day, and for ever : but it must be ad« 
mitted, as an incontrovertible fact, that the under- 
i>tanding of christians hath not been always equally 
enlightened, nor their hearts equally impressed, by 
its principles. If we would determine ^concerning 
its energy and tendency, there may be a propriety, 
therefore, in going back, even seventeen hundred 
Tears, to those times, wlien it worked effectually 
*^ in those who believed It can be no di^sparage- 

ment to the Unitarian doctrine, if, in order to trace 
and display its influence, we make ttie same appeal 
to ages long since past, which we do with respect to 
Christianity itself. Such an appeal may imply the 
degeneracy of the present day ; but it doth not imply 
any defect or error in the principles, which are avow- 
edly embraced. The seed hath fallen into Had soil ; 
or its operation hath been impeded by unfavourable^ 
external circumstances. Men r?mj/, and often do^ 
hold the truth in unrighteousness. The effects may 
be dissimilar ; where the principles are the same. 
But it is asked, " whether ' the examples,' alleged 
by the author of the ' Letters,' are to the point ? 
Were the principles of christians in the apo&tolic 

[ * ^' Pr, Toulmin, it should seem^ can find no such fruits of 
Socinian doctrines as will support an appeal, and, thereforCj is 
under the necessity of going seventeen hundred years bask in 
search of examples.'* Sociniaiism Indefeiisibkj p, 7. 8- 

age 



( 137 ) 



*^ 2ige the same as those of Soclnlans ? With what 
face can Dir. Toidmin take it for granted that 

*^ they wercj or even go about to prove it as a medi* 
um of establishing the practical efficacy of modern 
Unitariamsm 

To this I answer j that I have mt taken for grant- 
ed the principles, on which I argue. I have assumed 
nothing. I have as mucJi appealed to my authorities, 
as Mr. Fuller himself, when he animadverts on the 
assertions of Dr. Priestley, Mr. Belsham, and Mr. 
Lindsay. I have placed the passages^ to which I 
appeal, before the reader. Nay, I have the advan- 
tage of Mr. Fuller, with respect to my authorities. 
The writings of those gentlemen, whom he quotes, 
are very probably not within the reach of those who 
peruse his tract ; and they must depend on his accu- 
racy, as well as fidelity, in quoting them. My au- 
thorities are in every one's hands. I appeal to the 
preaching of the apostles. I quote their express de» 
clarations. To those declarations, which awakened 
their hearers to enquire, men and brethirenj what 

shall we do to be saved To that preaching, 
which converted the world to Jesus, have I appeal- 
ed. Since it is confidently asserted, that Socinian** 
writers can not so much as pretend, that their doc- 
trine has, been used to convert profligate sinners to 
the love of God and holiness ; I bring forward, from 



[ *■ P. 8.3 



the 



( 138 )• 



the acts of the apostles, instances of thousands, 
were so converted by sermons, in which it doth not 
appear from the records of the historian, that any 
other principle was advanced to produce the effect, 
than such sentiments concerning God and his Christy 
as are avowed and maintained by those, who are now 
called Socinians, from Socinus ; who was eminent 
for his zeal and labours in restoring the primitive 
christian doctrine, after human e>$planations had 
been, for many ages, so blended with it, that it was 
not only obscured but in a manner lost. 

I do not pretend to say, that the apostolic doctrine 
bore the name of Unitarian ; or that it was then 
spoken of and described under this term. But that 
the principles, which now bear that name,, were the 
leading, essentia! principles, inculcated in the preach- 
ing of the apostks, and the sole subjects of their 
sermons, I do aver ; and, following the history of 
the apostles, from chapter to chapter, producing de- 
clarations, which, contain the same identical propo» 
sitions, that form the creed, called, in modern lan- 
guage. Unitarian, I have demonstrated the point, as 
far as facts can demonstrate a position. Mr. Fuller 
misrepresents me, when he says*, that, instead of 

meeting the enquiry on grounds, of moral tendea- 
^' cy, I have substituted in its place observations oe 

the meaning of scripture testimony."- — I have 



^ ( 139 ) 

produced the testimonies, themselves. They wanted 
no explanations. They are plain and explicit In 
themselves. My observations did not go to criticize 
and to interpret : but only to point out where the 
force of the testimony lieth : not to put a meaning 
on the preaching of the aposdes, but to direct the 
attention of the reader to their simple declarations. 
All that Mr. Fuller himself hath advanced against 
the conclusion I have drawn from the facts alleged, 
consists in suppositions only, or In distinguishing 
betweeen the acts and the principles of the apostles, 
or In his interpretation of the terms, Son of God^ 
Frince of Ufe^ &c. But he doth not^ he could not 
bring forward any express declarations concerning 
original sin, the deity of Christy or the atonement^ 
from the sermons In the Acts, 

Should the appeal be made from the Acts of the 
Apostles to the Epistles, addressed to various church- 
€s ; as exhibiting, In certain passages, the Trinitarian 
and Calvinlstic doctrines, though It be admitted those 
passages are justly quoted with this view, no censure 
can properly fall on me for omitting them. For the 
Epistles were written to thase^ who were already 
christians ; to those in whom faith and repentance 
had, previously^ originated. Those compositions^ 
therefore, ate not to the point, If we wish to show^. 
w^hat principles produced faith and repentance. To 
discover this we must turn to the discourses, by 



wUich 



C )■ 

wliich meti were couYctted to Cod^ and to the (sd%h 
of th^ g<^sp^^* 5^^^ I satisfied, that the 

Epistles do not contain the Trioitariait or Calvitiistic 
system. There miiV be passages In thtm^ which 
may be considered as afFovding a pkuiibk ground for 
the opiriionij of which. thm& syitams coniistt but 
thtie pmmgm^ mhm mwlmd in their contiection, 
v^hm §%phimd according to the rules of fair hiter- 
pretation, and not quoted by sound mm'dyr speak, I 
am convinced, neither the Calvinistic, nor the Trini- 
tarian creed. They relate to the degenerate manners^ 
of the a^^, to the election of the Gentiles into the 
churchy to the influence of the death of Christ in a 
mora! view, or aa the means of bringing men to 
God and breaking down the wall of partition be* 
tween Jews and Gentiles, and to the dignity of Christy 
as the head of his church, and the great medium of 
the divine mercy, and agent of the new, moral, and 
spiritual creation. The Calvinistic and Trinitarian 
schemes I consider, as interpretations put on pas- 
sages, which Simply express these sentiments. It i^ 
remarkable, that the large paragraph in the 5 th of 
the Romans, which expressly represents the conse* 
quences of the sin of Adam, and expatiates on this 
point, is silent about innate depravity ; limits these 
consequences to that death v/e al! die, when thi^- 
present life is extinguished ; and is directed, not to 
show the necessity of repentance and faith, but to^ 
illustrate the ex'tent of the divine grace in the gos- 
pel 



( 141 } 

pel. This IS tkeitiain point, which the author has 
in view. The whole discourse arose, not from the. 
utility or necessity of discussing the subject with 
regard to any practical influence, but from the pecu- 
liar state of things in the christian church at that 
time, when the Jews would^ have enforced on the 
Gentile converts a submission to the law of Moses^ 
in order tp .an admission to the blessings of the chris- 
tian covenant. The apostle vindicates the rights of 
the Gentiles, by displaying, in contrast with the 
partial effects of Adam's sin, the universal mercy of 
Ged, abounding to the remission of many .often ce^^ 
and to the gift of eternal hfe, arid extending its grace 
tmtc -all men.—These remarks might be illustrated 
by reference to this and other passages, at length ; 
fcut this would cany us into too w4de a field of dis- 
course.— These hints may serve as a key to the 
serious, candid^ and impartial perusal of the aposto- 
lical epistles. 

I would add, here, with respect to one pi mciple, 
on which great stress is laid by Mr. Fuller and others^ 
viz. human depravity, meahing by that term, I ap« 
prehend, hereditary depravity ; and for which some 
few passages are adduced from the epistles : it is ver^^ 
remarkablcs that our Lord Jesus never insists upon 
such a principle—Never insists upon it, did I say ?— 
The expression is too 'feeble. So far from it, he 
inculcates human innocence in the earliest period of 

life. 



( 142 ) 

life. He makes the first stage of human nature a 
standard of the dispositions required in his disciples ; 
the rule and model of conversion : the state to 
which we must be brought, not t\idit f rom which we 
must be recovered, Except ye be converted, and 
become as little children^ ye shall not enter into 
the kingdom of heaven," Mat. xviii. 3. It is 
a principle apparently leading to all manner of 
iniquity, to believe sin is natural to us^ that it is 
interwoven and ingrafted into our very constitu- 
^' tion, from our conception, and formation in the 
w^omb*.*^ 

On the w^hole, to use the words and the testimony 
of a judicious writer of the church of Scotland; 
Nothing could be more simple, plain, and unaf- 
fected, with respect to doctrine, discipline, or 
^' worship,; than primitive Christianity. How few 
and perspicuous the articles of faith prescribed by 
Christ and his apostles ! The belief of one God, 
and of the divine mission of his Son, Jesus Christ, 
*^ comprehended the whole of the primitive, chris- 
tian creed. Level to every capacity, and evinced 
" to every impartial understanding, the celestial 
" doctrine was not obscured and perplexed with 
" subtle questions from the school of Plato or Aris- 
totle, nor with over curious investigations of the 

Dr. Tayior'i Scriptural Doctrine of Origmal Sin.'* 3rdedit^ 
■ " ^ «^ divine 



( us } 

divine decrees, or discussions on subjects exceed* 
^* ing human capacity 

But it is time to advert to another reflection from 
Mr. Fuller's pen. The plain language of my per« 
formance,'^* he says, is, there are no examples to 
be foimd, of any considerable moral influence, 
which the Unitarian doctrine has had on the hearts 
and lives of men of late ages, and therefore I have 
*^ recourse to the preaching of the apostles, and 
have endeavoured to prove, that they were Unit- 
ariansf.'*— Whatever maybe Mr. Fuller's judg- 
ment, concerning the difliculty of finding examples 
of the moral influence of the Unitarian doctrine in 
men of late ages, I have, by mj appeal to memoirs 
©f the dead, shown, that it was not mi/ opinion ; 
and I have known, within the experience of my 
life, and do know, many, within the limited circle of 
my acquaintance many, highly estimable for probity^ 
benevolence, and piety. " But," as it has been truly 
observed, the extreme difficulty of making a just 
*v and full comparison of the characters of two nu- 
merous bodies of men, dispersed through various 
countries, must render any conclusion, from the 
partial and cursory survey of any individual, very 
*\ uncertain. Unless, indeed, the sect was so noto- 
rious for its knavery, licentiousness, and impiety, 

[* Dr. Brown on Scepticism and Dogmatising, P. 135, &c.] 

" as 



( 144 ) 

«^ as to lie under an Bniversal stigma of infamy ; 
which we have never heard to be the case with re* 
spect to the SociBians^*/^ There was a propriety, 
therefore^ in having recourse to the examples^ which 
it is appreheadedj the acts of the apostles afford. Here 
the appeal rests upon facts precisely ascertained and 
authenticated beyond a doubts Here the effects, pro- 
cmced by the doctrine^ stand in direct and immediate 
connection with the doctrine preached, and with that 
doctrine exclosively. For, though any degree of the 
influence felt might be ascribed, as Mr. "Fuller sug- 
gestSj to other principles; such as the belief of aGod^ 
the excellence and purity of his moral govemmentj 
and the dfvine origin of the Old Testament^ yet 
.these principles are not explicity introduced into the 
discourses and sermons, that were alleged : and the 
influence of them must have arisen from preparing 
snd disposing the mind for the reception of ot^er 
truths, and not from their being exhibited and urged 
at that time f. 

It was on hearing the specific facts, of Christ's mi« 
raeleSj sufferings and resurrection, that the impressions 
made by the preaching of the apostles discovered 
themselves. "What truths soever the hearers had before 
embraced ; what principles soever the apostles had 
taken for granted, the elFect^^ produced, are imputed 

[* Aiaalytical Heview for Augast^ 5,797. p, 148,] 
[f Page 44,] 

to, 



( 145 ) 

to, or are represented as arising, in close and obvious 
connection, from the truths and facts then adduced. 

It may be difficult, notwithstanding the tone of 
authority and triumph with which Mr. Fuller writes, 
for him to trace the supposed success of Calvinistic 
preachers, immediately, closely and exclusively to the 
Calvinistic doctrines they deliver : for they can 
not preach such tenets, without also bringing into a 
strong point ofvie'w, at the same time, the great prin- 
ciples of God's government, a resurrection and a fu- 
ture judgment, which the Socinians hold equally with 
themselves. And can He or any other pretend to sav, 
where the impressions made by these principles termi^ 
nate ; and those produced by the additional doctrines, 
by the explanations of the christian schem.e mingled 
widi the form-r. commence ? Is it possible, amidst 
such a ccmbinatiou of principles and influences, to 
ascertain the precise influence of each ? In the preach- 
ing of the apostles and the eiFects it produced, we see 
what the doctriiiej which was in substance pure Unit-» 
ananismj could do, and did do, by itself; free from 
any adventitious mixiirres. 

So that I must still consider the examples alleged 
from the Ac ts of the A postles^ so far from being foreign 
to the argument, as most pointed and to the pui pose; 
as furnishing a most decisive proof of the efficacy of 
pure Unitarianrsm ; of its efficacy in leading men to 
God, to faith, to holiness, and salvation. 

I siibmit 



( ) 



I submit this general defence of the ground I have 
taken, to your consideration, and remain 
Dear Sir, 

Respectfully, 
Your obhged Friend and Servant 



LETTER 



( 14^ ) 



LETTER II. 

Dear Sir> 

It appeared to me, when I first took up my pen, 
on the point discussed by Mr. Fuller, that a review of 
the preaching of the apostles was sufficient, to show 
what principles were essential to the production of 
faith and repentance : for they appeared under the 
character of *'holv men of God, who taught the way 
of salvation : they were ambassadors for Christ, stew_ 
*^ards of the mysteries of the kingdom of Heaven." I, 
therefore, reviewed their preaching, and rose from the 
search, satisfied that they had not taught the princi- 
ples, which Mr. Fuller represents as essentially effica- 
cious for the conversion of the world : satisfied that 
thev did not preach in the strain he has so strongly 
recommended, though tliey taught in the name of 
that Jesus, who is *• the way, the truth, and the life.'* 
Mr. J'uiler has impugned tlie propriety and force of 
rny argument. In my preceding letter, I have offer- 
ed some considerations to elucidate the force, and jus- 
tify the applicn.tion of it. I cheerfully leave it to the 
candid reader, to determine betw^een us. 

I would not, however, stop w^lth a defence of my 
own argument. I wish to offer to you, and through 
you to other readers, some rema:^ks on Mr. Fuller's 
method of reasoning : viz. to judge of doctrines by 
their effects, 

H 2 This 



( 148 ] 

This, he says, is a practice warranted by scripture. 

By their fruits ye shall know them." Matt* vii, 
16 He supposes that the passage relates to doc- 
trines, and points out a criterion, by which to try their 
truth. But this is not the case. It is a rule given, 
to judge not concerning principles^ but men ; not 
concerning the sentiments promulgated by them, but 
concerning their own characters and pretensions. The 
whole passage stands thus. Beware false pro- 
*^ pheiSy which come to you in sheep's clothing, but 

inwardly are ravening wolves. Ye shall know 
*• them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of 

thorns, or figs of thistles r" F'ruits m^Sin actions. 
Matt. iii. 8. xxi. 43. John xv. 2, 5. Col. i. 6. Men 
may assume fair appearances of humility and piety, 
but the works of iniquity, into which their sinful, 
avaricious, or ambitious views will betray them, will, 
in time, discover their real characters. The persons 
here pointed at, are hypocrites, and false prophets ; 
such as would falsely pretend a commission from God. 
Their pretensions might be blended with a true doc- 
trine, but their claims were founded in dissimulation. 
They would be discovered by their covetousness, love 
of gain, and lasciviousness. Such persons were soon 
to make their appearance. Our Lord doth not ex- 
*^ hort his disciples to reject whatever such men 

taught, but only to be upon their guard against 
ihern^ that they might not credit any thing merely 

Pag€ 4-] 

on 



f 149 ) 

on their authority Mr. Fuller, therefore, mistakes 
the text. It doth not sanction the test of truth, which 
he has adopted. Yet the force of all his reasoning, 
even supposing him to have sufficient grounds for 
accusing SocinianS) as a body of people, of a want 
of devotion and holiness, depends on the manner, in 
which he interprets those words. 

If he judge it proper and right, a just and conclu«= 
sive mode of reasoning, to infer the falsehood of 
Unitarian principles from the conduct of those who 
embrace them, and from the sentiments they may 
hold on other points, v/har will he do with ihe infer- 
ence that rnight be drawn (according to his ownmode 
of reasoning) from the immoralities of some of the 
first christians, whom the apostles thought It needful 
severely to reprehend ? Will he say, that those im« 
moralities impeached the truth and divinity of the 
gospel, which they^ who were guilty of them, had 
embraced? Need Mr. Fuller be reminded, that, as 
the apostle remarked, there have been persons who 

held'the truth in unrighteousness?'^ Rom.i. 18. Need 
Mr. Fuller be reminded, that great bodies of men, 
assembled to ascertain, profess, and sanction, by their 
votes and decrees^ the principles which he deems most 
essential to a holy conduct, have in those very trans- 
actions manifested the worst passions, and been whol- 
ly actuated by pride, ambition, indolence of spirit, and 



[* Doddridge's Family Expositor in loc. Note ( 1 )] 
H 3 



f 150 ) 



the lust of power ? Mr. Fuller knows the history of 
the ancient councils. Mr. Fuller knows the proceed- 
ings of the Synod of Dort : a Synod," says the his- 
torian, called only to please angry divines 
and from which a respectable person went away, 
exclaiming : O Dort ! Dort ! would to God I had 
never seen thee * !" What will Mr. Fuller say on 
the invariable certainty of his mode of reasoning, 
when he himself reflects, that his test can not apply 
to all times and places ? He asserts, w^ith an apparent 
air of triumph, that the congregations, where the So- 
cinian sentiments are taught, unless kept up by the 
accidental popularity of a preacher, or some other 
circumstances distinct from the doctrine delivered, 
generally fall into decay f." Hath not Mr. Fuller 
heard; [doth not Mr. Fuller know, that this has 
been often the case with congregations, where 
the Trinitarian and Calvinistic schemes have been 
preached ; and preached too by men of abilities, learn- 
ing, and true worth ? Is he to be told of the declen- 
sions of such societies ; and of the necessity there 
has been of uniting two such congregations, especi- 
ally in the metropolis, into one ? Hath he not heard 
com.plaints of unsuccessful labours from his brethren, 
whose zeal and ardor in the duties of their office have 
scarcely exhibited any signs of a decline ? I have, 

Brandt's History of the Reformation abridged, y. 2. p. 505, 530- J 



f f Systems compared, p. 54 ] 



( 151 ) 

now, before me, the lamentation of one, of no littie 
eminence : lamenting, that in the congregation, which 
is dear to him as one of the first fruits of his youth- 
ful ministry, w^hen many souls were called and saved 
by grace, though it is as large as in the best of his 
days, little real work has of late been done, *^From 
w^hence,niyGod,'^he exclaims, is this suspension? 
Is the fault in me, or is it in them ? Or is it, that I 
am to be called elsewhere^ by being driven to give a 
less portion of my time to a people, who by seeing, 
they see, and do not perceiye ; and by hearing, they 
heafj and do not understand In these instances 
Mr, F. it may be supposed, is ready to assign some 
principles and causes^ whatever they may be, which 
counteract the efficacy of the truth. He will be jus- 
tified by reason and experience in doing so. It is 
plain, from the parable of the sower, that the divine 
seed is not always productive of fruits : that the ener- 
gy of it may be overpowered by outward circum- 
stances J and that its efficac3v is dependent on the soil, 
in which it is sown. Why should not truth and can- 
dor admit the like considerations in abatement of the 
suspicion, that may lie against Unitarian principles 
from the defective piety and virtue of those who hold 
them ; especially if it can be showm, as I conceive I 
clearly have shown, that, under the influence of such 
principles, as now bear that name, one thousand havei 
been born in a day ? — - 



[* Rowland HilP* Journal gf a Tour, p. 65 ] 
H 4 



The^e 



( 152 ) 



These remarks on the test of truth, which Mr, 
Fuller would set up, viz. ivhat is that doctrine ^ in 
the present day^ which is productive of the best mo- 
ral effects^ derive support from the reflection of an 
excellent person ; who appears to have been disposed 
to apply this test to the different parties of chris- 
tians, but found its fallacy. All the churches in 
ChristendomjAmerican, Holland, FIungarian,Greek, 
Armenian, Moravian, have so much imperfection, 
and above all so little of the holy life, that lam 
sometimes at a loss where to look for the true church. 
Thanks be to God, in every denomination, in the 
church universal, I can read of particular persons and 
particular churches, and some clusters of churches, 
eminent for piety ; with all these my soul unites and 
harmonises*." 

Mr. Fuller's confidence in his test of truth may, 
probably, yield, in a degree, if not to these strictures, 
yet to the concession of a writer, who applauds his 
work. I'he eloquent Mr. Wilberforce affirms f, 
^' that the doctrines he calls peculiar, were griev- 
ously abused by many of the sectaries who, while 
they talked copiously of the free grace of Christ, 
and the operations of the Fioly Spirit, were by 
their lives an open scandal to the name of Chris- 
" tian.'* Yet neither Mr. Fuller, any more than 

[* Life of President Stiles. P. 20^«J 



[f Practical View, P. ^Scx] 



Mr, 



{ 153 ) 

Mr. W. thinks these doctrines the less true, be- 
cause they were professed by men of immoral 
characters. Let him not then be surprised, if se- 
riows Unitarians do not think the worse of their 
^' principles, because they are maintained by some 
who are not of a serious spirit. And let him ac- 
knowledge the fallacy/ of judging of the truth of 
principles by the characters^ of those who profess 
them*." 

It may be urged, as bearing with a serious weight,^ 
on the certainty of Mr. Fuller s test j that, at the 
grand period of separation from the church of Rome, 
the progress of morality was obstructed, am.ong the 
Lutherans and. the reformed. Few were em.ploy- 

ed," saith the historian, " in cultivating or pro- 

moting that noblest of all sciences, which has 
^' virtuOj life, and manners for its object. Calvin 
^' and his associates, in particular, left this master- 

science In a rude and Imperfect state f." This 
imputation does not appear to lie against the Polish 
Socinians. Witness Socinus' Commentary on the 
5th and 6th of Matthew's Gospel, and the Etliics of 
Crelllus. The moral principles of Socinus were 
pure and elevated. And the Polish brethren were 
men emJnent fdr purity of character, humihty, ar^l 

Belsham's Review of Mr. Wilberforce's treatise. ?. 8vo 

edit.] 

[f Mosheim's Eccles. History, trant'ated by Maclainr. Vol, 4^ 
P. 120, 21. 1768.] 

U 5 serious- 



( 154 ) 

seriousness of spirit, and assiduous study of the 
scriptures*. If we judge by such instances, Mr. 
Fuller's argument will turn against him : and he 
will be left in the situation of the Philistines, com- 
plaining of the unfairness of the weapon by which 
Goliali Lost his headf.'* And he may learn to 
sympathize with me under the complaints, to whieli, 
he presumes, he has brought me. 

Mr. Fuller considers himself as adopting a mode 
of arguing, before employed by my brethren against 
the CalvinistsJ. Here he is mistaken. The false- 
hood of Calvinistic doctrines has been inferred, not 
from the lives of Calvinists, but from the nature of 
the tenets themselves. These have been attacked 
as gloomy, of an immoral tendency, as subverting, 
indeed, the foundations of virtue, and precluding the 
necessity of righteousness of life. With great rea- 
son, in my opinion, have they been, on these 
grounds, censured and arraigned. In an early period 
of their promulgation, they left on the minds of 
men impressions very unfavourable to virtue. A 
set of people, called gospellers, thought, if they 
magnified Christ much, and depended on his merits 
and intercession, they could not perish, which way 

[* Memoirs of the Life of Faustus Socinus. P. 176, 7, 237. and 
Appendix II.] 

[f Socinianism Indefens. P. 31,} 

["I: Id. and psge 12.] 

soever 



{ l^^ ) 

soever they led their Hves. The doctrine of pre» 
destination led some into great impiety of life. 
Calvin himself seems to have been sensible of the 
licentious tendency of his doctrine of God's decrees ; 
for, instead of clearly showing that the consequences 
drawn from it did not justly follow from his 
opinicnj he warned the people not to think much 
on it*. 

Calvinism is the system, which represents the 
Divine Being as placing the eternal interests of the 
whole human race upon the hazard of the first man's 
obedience to a single injunction. It clothes the 
Deity with pojy^cr and justice, but it allow^s not the 
display ofjuercy, till an infinite satisfaction has an- 
swered the demands of justice. Here the most 
ngorous human severity in punishing finds a coun- 
terpart in the divine. Here implacable resentment 
sanctions its anger by the example of heaven. Flere 
vice meets with its best apology, and is taught to 
plead, in its excuse, that it is naturally woven into 
the constitution, even from our conception in the 
womb. Here the sinner is under a strong temptation 
to consider personal righteousness as superseded by 
the imputation of "Christ's rigliteousness. Here vir-. 
tuous desires, holy efforts, are enervated by an ap» 
prehension, that the fail of Adam has introduced into 
our frame a total impotence, and inabihty to what 
ns good. Here the fear of offending God, by our 

[* Bp.Burnetj as quoted by Dr. Jortin, Dissertation p, 96, 7.] 
K. 6 trans- 



( 156 ) 

transgressions, may well be considered as precluded 
by the awful sentence of eternal death, hanging over 
us from our birth, through the sin of our primogeni- 
tor. The obvious tendency of this system, unless 
counteracted by other principles, is to deprive peni- 
tence of its hope, virtue of its worth, and righteous- 
ness of its obligations. Its natural efFects are gloomy 
thoughts of the dispensations of God towards the 
children of men — sternness of temper, in imitation 
of the strict justice and the arbitrary sovereignty that 
are ever in the contemplation of the mind possessed 
by the principles of this system— and the arrogance 
of spiritual pride, in the presumption of being select- 
ed by a partial decree, and separated by irresistible 
grace, from the corrupt mass of mankind. 

The influence of the Trinitarian scheme also ap- 
pears to us, to be very hurtful. It introduceth con- 
fusion into our ideas of God by mystical distinctions. 
In the solemn duty of prayer, when it is most desira- 
ble that the mind should be composed and the heart 
united, the soul is divided by different objectSy and 
feels perplexed and distracted by an uncertainty to 
which principally to direct its attention and addresses. . 
This I assert on the experience of those who have ac- 
knowledged, that it hath been their own case, and 
that it took much from the pleasure and satisfaction 
of their devotional exercises. The great doctrine of 
the divine Unity, which it was the end of the Jewish 
and christian revelations to revive and preserve in the 
world, is, by the notion of a Trinity of persons, equal 

in 



( 157 ) 

in power and glory, obscured, and in danger of being 
lost ; for the idea of an cqitaUUj necessarily implietli 
a separate existence : and how is it possible that 
each should be true, very and eternal God, and yet 
that there should be but one God ? The evil of this 
doctrine is, however, that it not only introduces into 
our conceptions of the Supreme Bemg absurd, re- 
pugnant metaphysical distinctions ; but it giveth to 
each person a peculiar and appropriate moral charac- 
ter ; the Father is the ofFended majesty, the Son is 
the benevolent mediator : the Father is an angry 
being, of rigorous justice ; the Son is com.passionate, 
and interposes between the Creator and the sinner, 
to screen the latter from wrath. The consequence 
of these viev^^s is, that the Father of all, the 
Father of ??26';y7V''5, is aculressed with dread; and 
hope, and love, and joy, are almost wholly transferred 
to the Son. The consequence of these notion^ is, 
that the infallible rule and principle of devotion, laid 
down in the New Testament, is entirely reversed : 
that rule is, that Jesus Christ should be confessed to 
be the Lord, to the glory of God^ the Father : but 
on this scheme, the glory of Christ is, if not in words, 
yet, in fact, the final object. According to the 
general tenor of their devotions, according to the 
general strain of their language, in the creed and 
worship of Trinitarians, the Mediator becomes the 
principal, and the honor due to the Sender is paid to 
him who was sent. 

We 



( 158 ) 

We see and observe these consequence, of the 
Calvinistic and Trinitarian schemes with deep concern, 
as destroying the simplicity and tarnishing the glory 
of the gospel, and as unfriendly to moral virtue. Vy^'e 
wonder^ that the advocates of these systems do not 
themselves see these consequences arising out of them. 
We impute it to the influence of habit and the pow- 
er of prejudice : and conceive it to be the effect of 
hearingno other doctrine, and of not opening the mind 
to free discussion and examination. 

But we lament, that these consequences, in our 
opinion obviously arising out of these systems, though 
not seen and admitted by those who embrace them, 
being discerned and felt by o///€;\?, create objections to 
Christianity itself, and lead manv to reject it. This is 
exempliiiedby the circumstances, withwhich origina- 
ted two elaborate works of the learned Whitby 
He had himself implicitly received the Calvinistic 
system from his tutors. He afterwards fell into com- 
pany with two gentlemen, who on account of its 
doctrines, were strongly disposed to discard Christiani- 
ty. This set him diligently to peruse the writings 
of antiquity, and to examine the scriptures, toseev/nat 
foundation they had in either. The result was a con- 
viction, that they had no foundation there f. Not 

Tractatus de Imputatione divina Peccati Adami Postcris ejus, 
Svo, 17 li. A Discourse concerning Election Sec. 1710.] 

[f Preface to the Discourse onEkction. p 4. ^.j 

all 



f ) 

all who are ofFendeJ, with the palpable absurdities of 
the creeds generally professed by christians, act the 
candid and fair part, which Dr. Whitby pursued; but 
they reject Christianity at once without inquiry. 
This appears to have been the case with the cele- 
brated Lord Bohngbroke ; w^ho, taking it for granted 
thai Paul taught the doctrines of election and reproba- 
tion, on this ground pointed his reflections against re- 
velation itself '^''. Many think enough to create dcubts 
and difficulties in their own minds ; but not enough 
to settle their judgment by patient and calm exami- 
nation. They soon grow weary with the labour ; 
and, precipitate in their conclusions, having begun with 
the highest orthodo3<v, terminate their rapid inquiry 
with scepticism and infidelity. This issue is ascribed 
by such writers as Mr. Fuller, to the] tendency of 
those principles, which they might,, in an intermediate 
stage of this mental revolution, have adopted : when 
it ought to be traced back to the absurd creeds^ im- 
posed upon th^ir credulous minds in youth. 

I am tempted here to give, as pertinent in this con- 
nection, the sensible and liberal remarks of a writer, 
in the Evangelical Magazine f. "I am not so 

much surprised at the progress of infidelity, be- 
*^ cause, L think, the present corruptions of christi- 

anity naturally account for it. The religion of 

See Sikes on the Hebrews, Preface, p. 5 2; 54.] 
£f For Jar.uary, 1798* p, 22.] 

Jesus^ 



( 160 ) 

Jesus, in its primitive simplicity, successfully en-« 

" countered opposition, and was received, at its first 
publication, on the ground of its own cvidenceSr 
But men gradually began to profess it, because It 

" was the religion of their ancestors, without con- 
sidering it for themselves. This spirit of IndifFer- 
ence exposed them to imposture; and gave design- 
ing men an opportumty to corrupt the divine origi- 
nal, to serve their own purposes. Hence Christianity 
became loaded with imposition upon imposition ; 
with doctrines, ceremonies, superstitions, and a 
vast heap of wood, hay and stubble, which the 

^* Christianity of the NewTestamicnt knows nothing 
of. In this unhappy manner hath it been disfigured 
to the present day. Tlie real genius of the gospel 
is burled so deep in this rubbi&h, that it requires 

^< the sacrifice of prejudiccy and the exertion of seri- 
ous inquiry, to discern and distinguish it. When 
freedom of thought awakes, and the spirit of iiber- 
ty begins to burst the shackles, men look onr the 
mass of what they have been taught to call chris- 

^' tianity, and discovering so much superstition and 
priestcraft, they turn aw^ay from it with hasty de- 
signs, condemning the whole without examina- 
tion. Thus the extreme of credulity is succeeded 
by the opposite extreme of volatile and obstinate 
infidelity." 

This is a just account of the transition from high 
orthodoxy to infidelity. The only infidels I have 

ever 



( 161 ) 

ever personally known," says a late writer, '^'Iiave 
first been enthusiasts of the Calvinisticpersuasion^^.'* 
When, It hath been pertinently observed, the bow has 
been bent too tight, it will turn back. This, it will often 
do with a sudden spring, and an almost instantaneous 
elasticity. It has been said, that^ such was the im- 
pression made on the minds of the colliers of Kings- 
wood by ''The Age of Reason," that they sold their 
Bibles for sixpence : yet, from this rapid transition, 
Mr. Fuller, I presume, will not conclude a near affi- 
nity betvv^een Methodism and Infidelity : and that the 
latter is the natural oiFspring of the former. 

But Mr. Fuller conceives, that he has proved^ by 
several arguments, the direct tendency of Socinianism 
to Deism ; of which I have taken no notice f. To 
cut ofF the ground of complaint, that his arguments 
on this head have been treated wdth neglect, I would 
lead you into a concise review of his Fifteenth Let-= 
ter, in The Caivinistic and Sochiian Systems com- 
^* pared ;" the subject of which is the resemblance 
of Socinianism to Deism, and the tendency of the 
one to riie other." This he attempts to prove from 
the agreement of their principles, their prejudices, 
their spirit, and their success. ^' One of the most im- 
portant principles in the scheme of inndelitv," he 

[* Sappho Search's Poetical Review of Miss Hannah More's 
Strictures, p. 12, Note,] 

[f Socinianism Indefensible_j, p. 27,] 

sayr* 



( 162 ) 



says, *^ It IS well known, is The Sufficiekcy of 
^' HUMAN Reason. If it shouldprove that the same 
principle occupies a place, yea^ and an equally im- 
portant place in theSocinian scheme, itwill follow 
^* thatSocinianism and Deism must be nearly allied*** 
This he considers has been generally imputed by wri- 
ters of note to the Socinians. He admits, that Dr* 
Priestley, as to himself, denies the charge^ Letter iy# 
to Mr* Burn, and appeals to his writings, designed to 
prove the insufficiency of hum^n reason. How then,^ 
you may ask, does Mr. Fuller establish the Imputa- 
tion ? By one solitary evidence. Mr, Robin.?on, 
whom Dr. Priestley glories in as his convert, affirms 
much the same thing, and that in his ' History 
^< of i aptism,' a ^T^^ork published after he had adopt* 
ed the Socinian system. In answering an cbjec- 
tion brought against the Baptists as being enthu- 
siasts, he asks, ' V/ere CasteUio, and Servetus, 
Socinus and Crellius, enthusiasts ? On the con- 
trary, they are taxed with attributing too much to 
reason, And the SurricrENCY of Reason is 
^' THE Soul of their System." P, ^4. 

Here it maybe asked, why are the Socinians to be 
made responsible for any assertion of Mr, Robinson ? 
Why are his sentiments, and occasionaHy introduced, 
to be considered as the standard of the Socinian 
creed ? Has he ever been advanced by them to the 
chair of infallibility ? May he not have mistaken 
their creed I May he not have written obscurely,, or 

uop^uard- 



( 163 ) 

unguardedly ? Was he ever engaged by them as an 
advocate ? These are points, which it might be pros- 
per to ascertain, before Mr. Fuller brought him for« 
ward, as a witness in his cause. However, waving 
these points, it should seem that Mr. Fuller has mis- 
applied the passage. It is; as he observes, an answer 
to the charge of enthusiasm brought against the 
Baptists ; w^hat then can the sufficiency of reason 
mean in this connection ? Not its competence inde- 
pendently of divine revelation : not its sufficiency by 
itself to guide and conduct all men to the knowledge 
of God, and to future happiness, without heavenly 
communications ; but the cool, sober, rational exer- 
cise of the understanding, independently of individu- 
al, supernatural influences and illuminations, such as 
enthusiasts pretend to receive. Reason here stands 
opposed not to revelation, but to an imnaediate divine 
energy, bearing a%vay the exercise of the judgments 
In the preceding paragraphs Mr. Robinson speaks 
of the Baptists as acting on a cool, rational and de- 
^' liberate exercise of thought, and regulated by the 
^' express conwiand of scripture : and as mxaking 
the rtritteii n'ord of God the sole rule of their faith 
'•^ and practice. "—Had Mr. Fuller reflected on this 
connection of the words, he could not have conclu- 
ded from them that, if Mr. R.'s words be true, the 
systems of a Socinus and a Bolingbroke can not be 
wide asunder," Yet Mr. F. should, methinks-, 
have carefully examined the meaning of the passage, 

before 



f 164 ) 

before he grounded on it an inraputation, really, though 
undesignedlv, as void of truth as of candor* 

Another leading principle, c6mmon to Soclnians 
and Deists, is, Mr» Faliersays, *^ The nonimportance 
of principle itself, in order to the enjoyment of the 
divine favour." Quoting a passage from Mr. 
Paine, on the acceptableness olthe various modes, in 
which mankind have worshipped him, to the Divine 
Being ; he observes, the sentiment, which this wri- 
ter, andail others, of his stamp, would wish to pro- 
pagate, is, that in ?J1 modes of religion men maybe 
*• very sincere, and that, being so, all are alike accept- 
able to God. This h infidelity undisguised, yet 
this is more than Dr. Priestley has advanced in his 
Differences in Religious Opinions If this senti- 
meatbe infidelity undisguised ; the imputation, I con- 
ceive, will fall, where Mr. Fuller does not intend it 
should, and would revolt with abhorrence at the 
suspicion of its pointing. It will fall on the apos- 
tle Peter; who, with respect to those who w^ere not of 
the Jewish church and out of the covenant, declared ; 
Of a truth I perceive, that God is no respecter of 
persons ; but in every nation, he that feareth 
him and worketh righteousness is accepted of him."*' 
Acts, X. 34, 5. It will fall, I apprehend, on the 
apostle Paul ; who lays it down as an incontroverti- 
ble principle : that as many as have sinned 
without law, shall also perish without law ; and 



( 165 ) 

as many as have sinned in the law, shall be judged 
by the law ; and that God will render to every 
man, according to his works, to the Jew first and 
also to the Gentile.'' Rom. ii. 12, 6, 10. If, in 
this instance, there is a likeness between Socinians, 
and Deists, the likeness extends to the apostles of Christ 
also. The Soclnian may reflect with pleasure on the 
affinity. That a just and honourable sentiment of di- 
vine mercy and equity is held by others as well as 
by himself, is a ground of pleasing reflection. It is 
also so, that the high estimate, in v/hich he himself 
holds, that the devout gratitude, with which he em- 
braceth, Christianity, do not dispose him to \\m\i the 
benevolence of the universal parent ; nor tempt him 
to entertain hard thoughts of God, as reaping, where 
he has not sown, or gathering where he has not straw- 
ed ; and requiring an account of five talents, where 
he has entrusted but one. Why should this be con- 
sidered as tending to Deism ? Unless holding a com- 
mon truth should incline us to fall on other points, 
into the errors of those who embrace that truth. 
Where is the immediate connection between liberal 
and exalted thoughts of God's universal mercies, and 
rejectinghJs special favours ? Doth it follow, because 
I judge that sincerity, wherever the all-discerning eye 
of Deity beholds it, will be accepted ; that, therefore, 
I must think, that he who is at no pains to k7iow the 
truth and follow it, is not culpable, but blam-eless ? 
, On him, who acts on this principle, let the censure 

of 



( 166 ) 

of approximating to infidelity fall ; but not on the 
serious, conscientious Unitarian, who adheres to the 
profession of Christianity. 

" But passing the likeness between Socinianism 
and Deism in m.atters of principle, let us next 
consider," says Mr. F., the similarity of their 
prejudices this, it seems, consists in affecting to 
be ^' emancipated from vulgar prejudices^ and 
popular superstitions^ and to embrace a rational 
system of faith*." Affectation, wherever it is 
found, is censurable : but a superiority to vulgar 
prejudices, and popular superstitions, when it 
ariseth from inquiry and judgment, betokens 
wisdom and strength of mind ; and to be emanci- 
pated from them, must be, in some cases, a just 
ground of exultation. It w^as so with the converts 
from paganism to Christianity. It w^as so with the 
partisans of the reformation from popery. Was it 
not a command of Moses, not to follow a multi- 
tude to do evil ?" Was it not the exhort?,.tion of 
the apostle, be not conformed to this world ?" Do 
not these injunctions vindicate a desire of rising 
above vuigai errors and superstitions ? Do they not 
make it a duty ? It is, then, only to be blamed, to 
be looked upon as a prejudice, wdien it makes a mai\ 
precipitate in his conclusions, precludes patient in- 
quiry, and, without the conviction from evidence 
and argument, determines the judgment. Whatever 



[* P. 310, 312.] 



be 



( ) 

be the superstition it rejects, if it be paganism or 
popery, it may act in this manner. This only shows, 
that a just principle may be abused, and a laudable 
one perverted. But the abuse of it, in discarding 
the Calvinistic and Trinitarian systems, has no more 
a necessary connection with and tendency to Deism, 
than in rejecting any other sentiments and practices, 
that have been universally received. A likeness to 
Deism ought not, in truth and candor, to be imputed 
to it any more in the former, than in the latter case. 

Another ground, on which Mr. Fuller infers the 
alliance between Socinianism and Deism, is. That the 
success of the one, bears a proportion to that of the 
other, and resembles it in the most essential points*. 
Each, he represents, as successful amongst the same 
sort of people, viz. men of a speculative turn of 
mind ; and that the same disre2:ard of relio:ion in 
general, is equally favourable to both. It is by a 
disregard of all religion, that men become infidels ; 
and it is by the same means that others becom.e 
Sociniansf. This invidious representation is sup- 
ported by quotations from Dr. Priestley and Mr. 
Belsham, w^hich are given atlength in another place 
Here 1 would observe, first, that the nature, the truth 
and excellence of Unitarian or other sentiments, is 
not to be estimated by the temper and character of 
those who have been most ready to adopt them : but 
by their conformity to gooJ sense and scripture. 

P. 3^4' t 3^5—^7. t Letter IV, P, ^5, 6.] 

The 



( 16S ) 

The evidence, on which they rest, is independent of 
the dispositions of those who embrace them. In 
the next place, what those writers have advanced 
relates only to a particular class of Unitarians. Dr, 
Priestley speaks of many^ not of all^ Unitarians, 
Mr. Belsham refers to such as may be thej^r^^, from 
their minds being least attached to any set of princi- 
ples, to see the absurdities of a popular superstition. 
Mr. Fuller applies these remarks to the body of So- 
cinian converts ; he draws a general conclusion from 
a particular case. Again, thirdly, the disregard to 
religion," represented by these writers as favoura- 
ble to the reception of Unitarian sentiments, must, 
in all fair construction, be understood not as opposed 
to serious piety, to a disposition to search and pray, 
but to such a prepossession in favour of a particular 
system, such a tenacious addictedness to it, as renders 
the mind impatient of contradiction, and bars the 
access of evidence. Mr. Fuller will surely grant, 
that such is the state of mind with manv ; and can 
he deny, that even those w^io are indifferent to re- 
ligion, are more free from a bias in favour of a 
particular system, consequently more open to receive 
other views of things ? Dr. Priestley and Mr. Bel- 
sham do not justify this indifference to religion ; 
they only state a fact ; viz. its influence in a certain 
respect. Their assertions amount to this only, that 
even from a disregard to religion good may, and 
doth, in some cases, aiise. The languor, as well as 



( 169 J 

tile ardor, of men's affection, lukewarmness, as well 
as glowing zeal, shall praise the Lord, and subserve 
the process of his providence. The spread of truth 
may be, sometimes, owing to those who take very 
little interest in any modes and doctrines of religion : 
it may be adopted, to serve their own purposes, by 
the ambitions and lustfuL The reformation, in 
England, originated in the vices of Henry the Eighth. 
But will Mr. Fuller characterize its spirit by the 
causes, from which it sprang ; and, on this account, 
compare it to the licentiousness of paganism ? His 
mode of reasoning, if admitted, would bear hard on 
Christianity itself. In the same way, the religion of 
the holy Son of God may be represented as having 
an affinity to principles of licentiousness : for our 
Lord, addressing himself to the religionists of his 
day, declares ; " Verily, I say unto you, the publicans 
and harlots go into the kingdom of God before 
you." Mat. xxi. 31. Mr. Gibbon has, accord- 
ingly, in the wantonness of his wit and the boldness 
of his irony, repeatedly given a turn to the words of 
Jesus, and a representation of his deportment to such 
sort of characters, very similar to the strain of Mr. 
Fuller's argument from the words of Dr. Priestley 
and Mr. Belsham. The representation is not, in 
either instance, candid and fair. A general and ab- 
solute conclusion is drawn from passages, that ex- 
press only a comparative estimate of the infi^uence of 
a certain state of mind : from which it by no means 
I follows, 



( 1^0 ) 

follows, that the state of mind specified is, in itself^ 
laudable and innocent ; or that, in one case, it is 
congenial to the spirit of Unitarianism, or, in the 
other, to that of the gospel. 

Mr. Belsham himself has stated the principle, on 
which he considered an indifference to the practice 
of religion as favourable to the reception of a rational 
system of faith: but Mr. Fuller, though he has 
quoted the passage, does not appear to have attended 
to the force of it. The irien, who are most in- 
dilterent to the practice of religion, and whose 
Tdinds therefore are least attached to any set of 
principles^ will ever be the first to see the absurdi- 
ties of a popular superstition, and to embrace a 
rational system of faith." The remark, which 
Mr. Fuller makes, is, that " It is easy to see, one 
should think, from hence, what sort of characters 
those are who compose the body of Socinian con- 
verts." If this observation be meant to point at 
the future character as well as to the previous state 
of mind of such converts, Mr. Fuller is not supported 
by Mr. Belsham's concession : for, in the remaining 
part of the paragraph, which he omits, Mr. Belsham 
expresseth his persuasion, that this indifference to the 
practice of religion, as it would favour the reception, 
so it w^ould yield to the power, of a rational system 
of faith. Practical believers," he says, ^' will at 
length open their eyes, and feeling the benign in- 
fluence of just and generous principles, they will 

demon- 



( ni ) 

*^ demonstrate the excellence of their faith by tlie 
" superior dignity and worth of their character/' 
The energy of truth will can y them above their former 
state of mind and generate piety and goodness. This 
was the case with many of the early converts to 
Christianity ; who, previously to embracing it, wei e 
men of vicious character : but faith worked by 

love, and ended in keeping the commandments of 
*^ God." Truth enliglitens tiie understanding and 
purifies the heart. 

I will notice only one paragiaph more in Mr. 
Fuller's reply to myseii. I had expressed my sur-^ 
prise, that a resemblance and affinity to Deism bhouid 
be ascribed to the creed of those, among w^hom have 
appeared the most able critics on the scriptures, and 
the most eminent advocates for divine revelation. 
On this Mr. Fuller says, most eminent, no doubt, 

they are in the opinion of Dr. Toulmin^c" If 
this be meant as a sneer at my opinion, or an im.- 
peachment of my judgment, I am not solicitous to 
support the credit of either. The names of a Grotius^ 
Clarke, Sykes, Peirce, Benson^ Kaines, Locke, and 
Sir Isaac Newton f,^ carry an honour and renown 
with them entirely independant of my feeble suiFrage. 
Are these names unknown to Mr. Fuller ? Or will 

[f^ Socinianism Indefens. p. 26. J 



[f Some of these authors were in the Arian scheme; but all of 
them decided oa the doctrine of the divine Unity ^ 

I 2. he 



( 172 ) 

he presume to deny them the praise of eminent abili 
ties ? But let the eminency of their abihties' be 

what it may," he adds, " if the inspiration of the 
*^ sacred oragles be given up, interpolations are 

pleaded for, whole chapters cashiered, the writers 
*^ taxed with reasoning inconclusively, and the whole 

be declared an obscure book ; these sacred oracles 
*^ w^ill not admit them to be friends, but consider 

them as adversaries in disguise*." 

This induction of charges, drawn up without pre^ 
cision, is calculated to mislead the reader, and to im- 
press him with sentiments of horror against the 
writers, at whom it points. It may be concluded 
from it, that Antitiinitarian writers have been wholly 
<3ccupied in attacks upon the authority, perspicuity 
and accuracy of the scriptures. It m^ay be concluded, 
that their object has been, not to elucidate the scrip- 
tures, but to undermine the weight they bear, to cast 
reflections upon them, and to curtail them. It may 
be concluded, that Unitarian commentators only 
Iiave discarded the notion of a plenary inspiration, 
extending to all the books, and to the whole and all 
the parts of every book of scripture ; have departed 
from the common reading and version ; have had 
recourse to various readings, and, on the authority of 
manuscripts, rejected syllables, words, sentences, and 
paragraphs of scripture. It may be concluded, that 
they have, in this, been governed not by a laudable 

Id, 27.] 

and 



( r73 ) 

arid pious desire to ascertain the meaning and purity 
of the sacred canon, but solely by a solicitude to es- 
tablish their own system. It may be concluded, that 
the passages cashiered, or supposed to be interpolated, 
or considered as obscure or inconclusive, were those 
only, which relate to the Calvinistic and Trinitarian 
questions, and are considered as militating against the 
opinions of Unitarians. It m.ay be concluded, that 
theyare actuated by a consciousness, that, unless they 
had recourse to such a method of treating the scrip- 
tures, their sentiments could not stand an appeal to 
them. It may be concluded, that the alterations, 
proposed in the original text, are dictated merely by 
a bold and daring spirit of innovation ; the effects of 
a licentious liberty taken with the scriptures, and not 
regulated by solid, fixed principles of criticism and 
interpretation. Once more, it may be concluded^ 
that the pains bestowed by such writers, on the illus- 
tration of the scriptures, have produced nothing just 
and valuable^, and deserving attention. 

These conclusions, which Mr. Fuller's bill of in- 
dictment, indiscriminately, insinuates, can not be 
supported by evidence ; nor are founded in real fact. 
The new translation .^iven to some texts, tlie differ- 
ent readings assigned to others, the charge of obscu- 
rity, or of inconlusive reasoning, madeaganistanvj are 
only occasional and incidental: while they leave the 
general system of the christian history, the christian 
moralsj andtbe christian promises and hopes^the same 
I 3 as 



( 174 ) 

as it was before. They afFect particular passages^ 
but not the whole book. In the estimation of the 
best judges, these Unitarian writers have cast great 
!ight upon the scriptures, and are worthy of study, 
though not of implicit confidence. For this I appeal 
to the encomiums bestowed on them by a Law, a 
Watson, a Newcome, and a Doddridge. The inves- 
tigation of various readings was first taken up by the 
orthodox, and has been pursued by them : w^itnes&y 
Calvin, Beza, a Bengelius, aKennicot, and Griesbach. 
It is, by no means, peculiar and appropriate to Unit- 
arian^, to deny the plenary inspiration of the scrip- 
tures. Learned men, such as Tillotson and Burnet^ 
by no means partial to their system,, have waved in^ 
sis^ting upon it, and have admiited, that the question 
concerning the nature and extent of inspiration, is 
attended with considerable difficulties. It is not easy 
to see with what propriety it can be regarded as ceur 
s^urable to suppose, that there are obscurities and dif- 
ficulties in the sacred writings. The undertaking of 
every commentator necessarily implieth it. The 
apostle Peter scrupled not to assert, that in the wri- 
tings of ^' Paul, there were things hard to be underr 

stood," On which an eminent orthodox divine of the 
las century, observes, that it is plainly intimated-, 
that there are such things in the other parts of the 
holy writ. It is indeed an undoubted truth," he 
adds, " and Vv^hat no christian is, I think, in the least 

concerned to deny, that the books both of the Old 

" and 



( 175 ) 

and New Testament are not every where equally 
^[ clear and intelligible*." To some, from various 
causes, these obscurities will appear greater, and to 
involve more and larger parts o£ scripture than to 
others. 

But though, in all these instances, Unitarians are 
countenanced by the example of christians in the 
popular scheme, and have trod in the steps of the 
orthodox, yet on them is to rest the invidious charge 
of being " not friends to the sacred oracles, but 
^' adversaries in disguise." They, adversaries, Hvho 
have bestowed intense thought and labour on the 
study of the scriptures : who have aimed to purify 
them from errors and corruptions ; and have applied 
themselves to remove stumbling blocks in the way 
of their being received with veneration ! Thei/ 
adversaries, who have opened the treasures of learn- 
ing to explain them, and have endeavoured to obviate 
difSculties, that they might appear in their native 
purity, beauty, and force ! Thei/ adversaries, who 
thought closely, attended much to the connexion^ 
setting it in a most critical view, and have illustrated, 
sometimes in an admirable manner, the spirit of the 
sacred writer f! They adversaries, whose labours 
and writings go directly to evince the divine mission 

Atterbury's Posthumous Sermons, vol. i, p. 232.] 

[f Dr. Doddridge's Character of Locke, Peirce, and Benson; 
panicularly the latt. Preaching Lectures, ms-.] 

of 



( 176 ) 

of Jesus Christ, and to show the certainty of those 
subHme and excellent words of eternal life," 
which he preached ! They truly adversaries in 
disguise^ who have always stated difEcuIties fairly 
and candidly, in an open and frank manner dehvered 
their own sentiments, and given full scope to inves- 
tigation ! — 'iuch. ^wittY?^ adtyersaries to the sacred 
oracles ! Good sense rejects the imputation, as 
absurd : — candor laments it, as ungenerous. 

Here I will take my leave of Mr. Fuller, He 
will act, with respect to this rejoinder,^ as his own 
judgment shall dictate. It is very immaterial to me, 
who has the last word; if he thinks fit to reply 
again, I shall readily quit the field of controvery to 
him. From what I have observed on the progress of 
opinion concerning the main points on which we 
diiFer, the unity or God and the*- humanity ot Christ 
Jesus, and from my views of the tenor and declara- 
tions of scripture, a conviction is produced in my 
mind, that the sentiments for which I plead, and 
which you. Sir, embrace, on these points, will even- 
tually be those of the whole christian world : when 
Mr. Fuller's name and my own, and the part each of 
us has taken in this controversy, shall be forgotten. 

But should I be mistaken, or be too sanguine in 
my expectations, I hope to rest with perfect satis- 
faction in this general persuasion, that the truth, 
whether it be with him, or with me, or with neltlier 
of us^ will finally prevail,^ 

Ire. 



( ) 

I remain, submitting these pages to your candid 
onsideration, with sincere respect, 
^ Dear Sir, 

Your obliged Friend and Servant 

Taunton, 
8th Dec. 1800.] 



THE END, 



rUBLISHED BY JOSHUA TOULMIN, D.D. 



AND SOLD BY 

J. Johnson, st. Paul's church yaRjD. 

i 

1. Dissertations on the Internal Evidences and Excel- 
lence of Christianity ; and on the Character of ChrisIT 
Compared with that of some other celebrated Founders 
of Religion and PhiloKophy* To v.-liich are added 
Strictures on some Passages i'datlve to Unitarian'^ In the 
Writings of Bishop HuKSLiY and Doctor White^ Svo^ 
4s. boards, 

Q, Sermons, principally addressed to Youths witb 
some Forms of PiayerSj 2nd Edit, 8vo. 3s. sewed. 

3. The History of the Town of Taunton, in the 
County of So^MEiiSET : with Plates, 4to. 7s. 6d. boards.. 

4. A New Edition of Mr.. Neal's Kistory of the 
Puritans, 5 Vols. 8vo. 

5. Sermoas on several Evangelical and Practical Sub- 
jects. By the late Revereni and Learned Samuel 
Morton Savage, D. D. To which are prefixed 
Memoirs of the Life of the Author, 8vo. 6s. boards. 

6. Christian Views of Death : a Sermon on the Death 
of the Rev, Peard Jillard. 



7. The Name Lord of Hosts/' Explained and Iir- 
proved, in a Sermon^ 

In 



In the Fress, 
NOTES ON THE BIBLE, 

FROM THE MS. OF THE LATE 

REVEREND AND LEARNED CHARLES BULKLEY, 
la Three Vols, Octavo. 



C. Stower, Printerj 
King Street, Covent Garden. 



t3l 



■ , 0 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: May 2006 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
(724) 779-21 1 1 



